Which Local Search Operator Works Best for the Open-Loop TSP?

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Which Local Search Operator Works Best for the Open-Loop TSP? applied sciences Article Which Local Search Operator Works Best for the Open-Loop TSP? Lahari Sengupta *, Radu Mariescu-Istodor and Pasi Fränti Machine Learning Group, School of Computing, University of Eastern Finland, 80101 Joensuu, Finland; [email protected].fi (R.M.-I.); [email protected].fi (P.F.) * Correspondence: [email protected].fi; Tel.: +358-417232752 Received: 6 August 2019; Accepted: 17 September 2019; Published: 23 September 2019 Abstract: The traveling salesman problem (TSP) has been widely studied for the classical closed-loop variant. However, very little attention has been paid to the open-loop variant. Most of the existing studies also focus merely on presenting the overall optimization results (gap) or focus on processing time, but do not reveal much about which operators are more efficient to achieve the result. In this paper, we present two new operators (link swap and 3–permute) and study their efficiency against existing operators, both analytically and experimentally. Results show that while 2-opt and relocate contribute equally in the closed-loop case, the situation changes dramatically in the open-loop case where the new operator, link swap, dominates the search; it contributes by 50% to all improvements, while 2-opt and relocate have a 25% share each. The results are also generalized to tabu search and simulated annealing. Keywords: traveling salesman problem; open-loop TSP; randomized algorithms; local search; NP–hard; O–Mopsi game 1. Introduction The traveling salesman problem (TSP) aims to find the shortest tour for a salesperson to visit N number of cities. In graph theory, a cycle including every vertex of a graph makes a Hamiltonian cycle. Therefore, in the context of graph theory, the solution to a TSP is defined as the minimum-weight Hamiltonian cycle in a weighted graph. In this paper, we consider the symmetric Euclidean TSP variant, where the distance between two cities is calculated by their distance in the Euclidean space. Both the original problem [1] and its Euclidean variant are NP–hard [2]. Finding the optimum solution efficiently is therefore not realistic, even for the relatively small size of the input. O–Mopsi (http://cs.uef.fi/o-mopsi/) is a mobile-based orienteering game where the player needs to find some real-world targets, with the help of GPS navigation [3]. Unlike a prior instruction of visiting order in the classical orienteering, O–Mopsi players have to decide the order of visiting targets by themselves. The game finishes immediately when the last target is reached. The player does not need to return to the start target. This corresponds to a special case of the orienteering problem [4]. Finding the optimum order by minimizing the tour length corresponds to solving open-loop TSP [5], because the players are not required to return to the start position. The open-loop variant is also NP–hard [2]. The solution to a closed-loop TSP is a tour; however, the solution to an open-loop TSP is an open path. Hence, a TSP with the size N contains N links in its closed-loop solution and N-1 in its open-loop solution (Figure1). However, the optimum solution to an open-loop TSP is not usually achievable by removing the largest link from the optimum solution to the closed-loop TSP (Figure1). Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3985; doi:10.3390/app9193985 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3985x FOR PEER REVIEW 22 of of 2426 Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 26 Figure 1. Difference between open- and closed-loop traveling salesman problem (TSP). FigureFigure 1. 1. DifferenceDifference between between open open-- and and closed closed-loop-loop traveling traveling salesman salesman problem problem ( (TSP).TSP). In O–Mopsi, players are not required to solve the optimum tour, but finding a good tour is still In O–Mopsi, players are not required to solve the optimum tour, but finding a good tour is still an essentialIn O–Mopsi, part ofplayers the game. are not Experiments required to showed solve the that, optimum among tourthe players, but finding who completeda good tour a isgame, still an essential part of the game. Experiments showed that, among the players who completed a game, anonly essential 14% had part found of the the game. optimum Experiments tour, even showed if the that, number among of targetsthe players was aboutwho completed 10, on average a game, [3]. only 14% had found the optimum tour, even if the number of targets was about 10, on average [3]. onlyThe optimum14% had foundtour is the still opt neededimum fortour reference, even if whenthe number analyzing of targets the performance was about of10, the on players.average This[3]. The optimum tour is still needed for reference when analyzing the performance of the players. This is Theis usually optimum made tour as is a stillpost needed-game analysisfor reference but can when also analyzing happen duringthe performance real-time ofplay the. A players. comparison This usually made as a post-game analysis but can also happen during real-time play. A comparison can be iscan usually be made made with as a thepost tour-game length analysis or withbut can the also visiting happen order. during The real game-time creator play. Aalso comparison needs an made with the tour length or with the visiting order. The game creator also needs an estimator for the canestimator be made for thewith tour the length, tour lengthas it will or be with published the visiting as a part order. of the The game game info. creator If the gamealso needsis created an tour length, as it will be published as a part of the game info. If the game is created automatically on estimatorautomatically for the on tour the length,demand, as TSPit will must be published be solved asreal a part-time. of Thethe gameoptimality info. Ifis thehighly game desired is created, but the demand, TSP must be solved real-time. The optimality is highly desired, but can sometimes be automaticallycan sometimes on be the compromised demand, TSP for must the sake be solvedof fast processing.real-time. The optimality is highly desired, but compromised for the sake of fast processing. can sometimesThe number be compromised of targets in for the the current sake of O fast–Mopsi processing. instances varies from 4 to 27, but larger The number of targets in the current O–Mopsi instances varies from 4 to 27, but larger instances instancesThe number may appear. of targets For the in smaller the current instances, O–Mopsi the rela instancestively simple varies branch from- and4 to-bound 27, but algorithm larger may appear. For the smaller instances, the relatively simple branch-and-bound algorithm is fast enough instancesis fast enough may appear.to produc Fore the smalleroptimum instances, tour. However, the rela tivelyfor the simple longer branch instances,-and it-bound might algorithm take from to produce the optimum tour. However, for the longer instances, it might take from minutes to hours. isminutes fast enough to hours. to produc Alonge thewith optimum the exact tour. solver, However, a faster for heuristic the longer algorithm instances, is therefore it might takeneeded from to Along with the exact solver, a faster heuristic algorithm is therefore needed to find the solution more minutesfind the tosolution hours. Alongmore quickly, with the in exact spite solver, of the adanger faster heuristicof occasionally algorithm resulting is therefore in a sub needed-optimal to quickly, in spite of the danger of occasionally resulting in a sub-optimal solution. Besides O–Mopsi, findsolution. the solution Besides more O–Mopsi, quickly, TSP in arisesspite ofin the route danger planning of occasionally [6], orienteering resulting problem in a subs -optimal[7], and TSP arises in route planning [6], orienteering problems [7], and automated map generation [8]. solution.automated Besides map generation O–Mopsi, [8]. TSP arises in route planning [6], orienteering problems [7], and An example of O–Mopsi play is shown in Figure2, with a comparison to the optimum tour automatedAn example map generation of O–Mopsi [8]. play is shown in Figure 2, with a comparison to the optimum tour (reference). For analyzing, we calculate several reference tours: optimum, fixed-start, and dynamic. (reference).An example For analyzing,of O–Mopsi we play calculate is shown several in Figure reference 2, with tours: a comparisonoptimum, fixed to -thestart, optimum and dynamic tour . The optimum tour takes into account the fact that the players can freely choose their starting point. (reference).The optimum For tour analyzing, takes into we account calculate the several fact that reference the players tours: can optimum freely choose, fixed- start,their startingand dynamic point.. Since selecting the best starting point is challenging [9], we also calculate two alternative reference TheSince optimum selectin gtour the takesbest startinginto account point the is challengingfact that the [9], players we also can calculatefreely choose two alternativetheir starting reference point. tours from the location where the player started. Fixed-start is the optimum tour using this starting Sincetours selectinfrom theg thelocation best startingwhere the point player is challenging started. Fixed [9],- startwe also is the calculate optimum two tour alternative using this reference starting point. The dynamic tour follows the player’s choices from the starting point but re-calculates the new tourspoint. from The thedynamic location tour where follows the playerthe player’s started. choices Fixed -fromstart isthe the st optimumarting point tour but using re-calculates this starting the optimum every time the player deviates from optimum path. Three different evaluation measures are point.new optimumThe dynamic every tour time follows the playerthe player’s deviates choices from from optimum the st artingpath.
Recommended publications
  • A Branch-And-Price Approach with Milp Formulation to Modularity Density Maximization on Graphs
    A BRANCH-AND-PRICE APPROACH WITH MILP FORMULATION TO MODULARITY DENSITY MAXIMIZATION ON GRAPHS KEISUKE SATO Signalling and Transport Information Technology Division, Railway Technical Research Institute. 2-8-38 Hikari-cho, Kokubunji-shi, Tokyo 185-8540, Japan YOICHI IZUNAGA Information Systems Research Division, The Institute of Behavioral Sciences. 2-9 Ichigayahonmura-cho, Shinjyuku-ku, Tokyo 162-0845, Japan Abstract. For clustering of an undirected graph, this paper presents an exact algorithm for the maximization of modularity density, a more complicated criterion to overcome drawbacks of the well-known modularity. The problem can be interpreted as the set-partitioning problem, which reminds us of its integer linear programming (ILP) formulation. We provide a branch-and-price framework for solving this ILP, or column generation combined with branch-and-bound. Above all, we formulate the column gen- eration subproblem to be solved repeatedly as a simpler mixed integer linear programming (MILP) problem. Acceleration tech- niques called the set-packing relaxation and the multiple-cutting- planes-at-a-time combined with the MILP formulation enable us to optimize the modularity density for famous test instances in- cluding ones with over 100 vertices in around four minutes by a PC. Our solution method is deterministic and the computation time is not affected by any stochastic behavior. For one of them, column generation at the root node of the branch-and-bound tree arXiv:1705.02961v3 [cs.SI] 27 Jun 2017 provides a fractional upper bound solution and our algorithm finds an integral optimal solution after branching. E-mail addresses: (Keisuke Sato) [email protected], (Yoichi Izunaga) [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 8 VARIABLE NEIGHBORHOOD SEARCH
    Chapter 8 VARIABLE NEIGHBORHOOD SEARCH Pierre Hansen GERAD and HEC Montreal, Canada Nenad Mladenovic GERAD and Mathematical Institute, SANU, Belgrade, Serbia 8.1 INTRODUCTION Variable Neighborhood Search (VNS) is a recent metaheuristic, or frame­ work for building heuristics, which exploits systematically the idea of neigh­ borhood change, both in the descent to local minima and in the escape from the valleys which contain them. In this tutorial we first present the ingredients of VNS, i.e. Variable Neighborhood Descent (VND) and Reduced VNS (RVNS) followed by the basic and then the general scheme of VNS itself which contain both of them. Extensions are presented, in particular Skewed VNS (SVNS) which enhances exploration of far-away valleys and Variable Neighborhood Decomposition Search (VNDS), a two-level scheme for solution of large in­ stances of various problems. In each case, we present the scheme, some illus­ trative examples and questions to be addressed in order to obtain an efficient implementation. Let us consider a combinatorial or global optimization problem min/(x) (8.1) subject to xeX (8.2) where f{x) is the objective function to be minimized and X the set oi feasible solutions. A solution x* e X is optimal if fix*) < fix), VxeX (8.3) An exact algorithm for problem (8.1)-(8.2), if one exists, finds an optimal solution X*, together with the proof of its optimality, or shows that there is no 212 HANSEN AND MLADENOVIC feasible solution, i.e. X = 0. Moreover, in practice, the time to do so should be finite (and not too large); if one deals with a continuous function one must admit a degree of tolerance, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Heuristic Search Viewed As Path Finding in a Graph
    ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE 193 Heuristic Search Viewed as Path Finding in a Graph Ira Pohl IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, New York Recommended by E. J. Sandewall ABSTRACT This paper presents a particular model of heuristic search as a path-finding problem in a directed graph. A class of graph-searching procedures is described which uses a heuristic function to guide search. Heuristic functions are estimates of the number of edges that remain to be traversed in reaching a goal node. A number of theoretical results for this model, and the intuition for these results, are presented. They relate the e])~ciency of search to the accuracy of the heuristic function. The results also explore efficiency as a consequence of the reliance or weight placed on the heuristics used. I. Introduction Heuristic search has been one of the important ideas to grow out of artificial intelligence research. It is an ill-defined concept, and has been used as an umbrella for many computational techniques which are hard to classify or analyze. This is beneficial in that it leaves the imagination unfettered to try any technique that works on a complex problem. However, leaving the con. cept vague has meant that the same ideas are rediscovered, often cloaked in other terminology rather than abstracting their essence and understanding the procedure more deeply. Often, analytical results lead to more emcient procedures. Such has been the case in sorting [I] and matrix multiplication [2], and the same is hoped for this development of heuristic search. This paper attempts to present an overview of recent developments in formally characterizing heuristic search.
    [Show full text]
  • Cooperative and Adaptive Algorithms Lecture 6 Allaa (Ella) Hilal, Spring 2017 May, 2017 1 Minute Quiz (Ungraded)
    Cooperative and Adaptive Algorithms Lecture 6 Allaa (Ella) Hilal, Spring 2017 May, 2017 1 Minute Quiz (Ungraded) • Select if these statement are true (T) or false (F): Statement T/F Reason Uniform-cost search is a special case of Breadth- first search Breadth-first search, depth- first search and uniform- cost search are special cases of best- first search. A* is a special case of uniform-cost search. ECE457A, Dr. Allaa Hilal, Spring 2017 2 1 Minute Quiz (Ungraded) • Select if these statement are true (T) or false (F): Statement T/F Reason Uniform-cost search is a special case of Breadth- first F • Breadth- first search is a special case of Uniform- search cost search when all step costs are equal. Breadth-first search, depth- first search and uniform- T • Breadth-first search is best-first search with f(n) = cost search are special cases of best- first search. depth(n); • depth-first search is best-first search with f(n) = - depth(n); • uniform-cost search is best-first search with • f(n) = g(n). A* is a special case of uniform-cost search. F • Uniform-cost search is A* search with h(n) = 0. ECE457A, Dr. Allaa Hilal, Spring 2017 3 Informed Search Strategies Hill Climbing Search ECE457A, Dr. Allaa Hilal, Spring 2017 4 Hill Climbing Search • Tries to improve the efficiency of depth-first. • Informed depth-first algorithm. • An iterative algorithm that starts with an arbitrary solution to a problem, then attempts to find a better solution by incrementally changing a single element of the solution. • It sorts the successors of a node (according to their heuristic values) before adding them to the list to be expanded.
    [Show full text]
  • Backtracking / Branch-And-Bound
    Backtracking / Branch-and-Bound Optimisation problems are problems that have several valid solutions; the challenge is to find an optimal solution. How optimal is defined, depends on the particular problem. Examples of optimisation problems are: Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP). We are given a set of n cities, with the distances between all cities. A traveling salesman, who is currently staying in one of the cities, wants to visit all other cities and then return to his starting point, and he is wondering how to do this. Any tour of all cities would be a valid solution to his problem, but our traveling salesman does not want to waste time: he wants to find a tour that visits all cities and has the smallest possible length of all such tours. So in this case, optimal means: having the smallest possible length. 1-Dimensional Clustering. We are given a sorted list x1; : : : ; xn of n numbers, and an integer k between 1 and n. The problem is to divide the numbers into k subsets of consecutive numbers (clusters) in the best possible way. A valid solution is now a division into k clusters, and an optimal solution is one that has the nicest clusters. We will define this problem more precisely later. Set Partition. We are given a set V of n objects, each having a certain cost, and we want to divide these objects among two people in the fairest possible way. In other words, we are looking for a subdivision of V into two subsets V1 and V2 such that X X cost(v) − cost(v) v2V1 v2V2 is as small as possible.
    [Show full text]
  • Module 5: Backtracking
    Module-5 : Backtracking Contents 1. Backtracking: 3. 0/1Knapsack problem 1.1. General method 3.1. LC Branch and Bound solution 1.2. N-Queens problem 3.2. FIFO Branch and Bound solution 1.3. Sum of subsets problem 4. NP-Complete and NP-Hard problems 1.4. Graph coloring 4.1. Basic concepts 1.5. Hamiltonian cycles 4.2. Non-deterministic algorithms 2. Branch and Bound: 4.3. P, NP, NP-Complete, and NP-Hard 2.1. Assignment Problem, classes 2.2. Travelling Sales Person problem Module 5: Backtracking 1. Backtracking Some problems can be solved, by exhaustive search. The exhaustive-search technique suggests generating all candidate solutions and then identifying the one (or the ones) with a desired property. Backtracking is a more intelligent variation of this approach. The principal idea is to construct solutions one component at a time and evaluate such partially constructed candidates as follows. If a partially constructed solution can be developed further without violating the problem’s constraints, it is done by taking the first remaining legitimate option for the next component. If there is no legitimate option for the next component, no alternatives for any remaining component need to be considered. In this case, the algorithm backtracks to replace the last component of the partially constructed solution with its next option. It is convenient to implement this kind of processing by constructing a tree of choices being made, called the state-space tree. Its root represents an initial state before the search for a solution begins. The nodes of the first level in the tree represent the choices made for the first component of a solution; the nodes of the second level represent the choices for the second component, and soon.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploiting the Power of Local Search in a Branch and Bound Algorithm for Job Shop Scheduling Matthew J
    Exploiting the Power of Local Search in a Branch and Bound Algorithm for Job Shop Scheduling Matthew J. Streeter1 and Stephen F. Smith2 Computer Science Department and Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition1 and The Robotics Institute2 Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213 {matts, sfs}@cs.cmu.edu Abstract nodes in the branch and bound search tree. This paper presents three techniques for using an iter- 2. Branch ordering. In practice, a near-optimal solution to ated local search algorithm to improve the performance an optimization problem will often have many attributes of a state-of-the-art branch and bound algorithm for job (i.e., assignments of values to variables) in common with shop scheduling. We use iterated local search to obtain an optimal solution. In this case, the heuristic ordering (i) sharpened upper bounds, (ii) an improved branch- of branches can be improved by giving preference to a ordering heuristic, and (iii) and improved variable- branch that is consistent with the near-optimal solution. selection heuristic. On randomly-generated instances, our hybrid of iterated local search and branch and bound 3. Variable selection. The heuristic solutions used for vari- outperforms either algorithm in isolation by more than able selection at each node of the search tree can be im- an order of magnitude, where performance is measured proved by local search. by the median amount of time required to find a globally optimal schedule. We also demonstrate performance We demonstrate the power of these techniques on the job gains on benchmark instances from the OR library. shop scheduling problem, by hybridizing the I-JAR iter- ated local search algorithm of Watson el al.
    [Show full text]
  • An Evolutionary Algorithm for Minimizing Multimodal Functions
    An Evolutionary Algorithm for Minimizing Multimodal Functions D.G. Sotiropoulos, V.P. Plagianakos, and M.N. Vrahatis Department of Mathematics, University of Patras, GR–261.10 Patras, Greece. University of Patras Artificial Intelligence Research Center–UPAIRC. e–mail: {dgs,vpp,vrahatis}@math.upatras.gr Abstract—A new evolutionary algorithm for are precluded. In such cases direct search approaches the global optimization of multimodal functions are the methods of choice. is presented. The algorithm is essentially a par- allel direct search method which maintains a If the objective function is unimodal in the search populations of individuals and utilizes an evo- domain, one can choose among many good alterna- lution operator to evolve them. This operator tives. Some of the available minimization methods in- has two functions. Firstly, to exploit the search volve only function values, such as those of Hook and space as much as possible, and secondly to form Jeeves [2] and Nelder and Mead [5]. However, if the an improved population for the next generation. objective function is multimodal, the number of avail- This operator makes the algorithm to rapidly able algorithms is reduced to very few. In this case, converge to the global optimum of various diffi- the algorithms quoted above tend to stop at the first cult multimodal test functions. minimum encountered, and cannot be used easily for finding the global one. Index Terms—Global optimization, derivative free methods, evolutionary algorithms, direct Search algorithms which enhance the exploration of the search methods. feasible region through the use of a population, such as Genetic Algorithms (see, [4]), and probabilistic search techniques such as Simulated Annealing (see, [1, 7]), I.
    [Show full text]
  • Branch-And-Price: Column Generation for Solving Huge Integer Programs ,Y
    BranchandPrice Column Generation for y Solving Huge Integer Programs Cynthia Barnhart Ellis L Johnson George L Nemhauser Martin WPSavelsb ergh Pamela H Vance School of Industrial and Systems Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta GA Abstract We discuss formulations of integer programs with a huge number of variables and their solution by column generation metho ds ie implicit pricing of nonbasic variables to generate new columns or to prove LP optimality at a no de of the branch andb ound tree We present classes of mo dels for whichthisapproach decomp oses the problem provides tighter LP relaxations and eliminates symmetryWethen discuss computational issues and implementation of column generation branchand b ound algorithms including sp ecial branching rules and ecientways to solvethe LP relaxation February Revised May Revised January Intro duction The successful solution of largescale mixed integer programming MIP problems re quires formulations whose linear programming LP relaxations give a go o d approxima Currently at MIT Currently at Auburn University This research has b een supp orted by the following grants and contracts NSF SES NSF and AFORS DDM NSF DDM NSF DMI and IBM MHV y An abbreviated and unrefereed version of this pap er app eared in Barnhart et al tion to the convex hull of feasible solutions In the last decade a great deal of attention has b een given to the branchandcut approach to solving MIPs Homan and Padb erg and Nemhauser and Wolsey give general exp ositions of this metho dology The basic
    [Show full text]
  • Hybridization of Interval Methods and Evolutionary Algorithms for Solving Difficult Optimization Problems
    THÈSE En vue de l’obtention du DOCTORAT DE L’UNIVERSITÉ DE TOULOUSE Délivré par : l’Institut National Polytechnique de Toulouse (INP Toulouse) Présentée et soutenue le January 27, 2015 par : Charlie Vanaret Hybridization of interval methods and evolutionary algorithms for solving difficult optimization problems JURY Nicolas Durand ENAC Directeur de thèse Jean-Baptiste Gotteland ENAC Co-encadrant de thèse El-Ghazali Talbi Université de Lille Rapporteur Gilles Trombettoni Université de Montpellier Rapporteur Jean-Marc Alliot IRIT Examinateur Jin-Kao Hao Université d’Angers Examinateur arXiv:2001.11465v1 [math.NA] 30 Jan 2020 Thomas Schiex INRA Toulouse Examinateur Marc Schoenauer INRIA Saclay Examinateur École doctorale et spécialité : MITT : Domaine STIC : Intelligence Artificielle Unité de Recherche : IRIT-APO (UMR 5505) Abstract Reliable global optimization is dedicated to finding a global minimum in the presence of rounding errors. The only approaches for achieving a numerical proof of optimality in global optimization are interval-based methods that interleave branching of the search-space and pruning of the subdomains that cannot contain an optimal solution. The exhaustive interval branch and bound methods have been widely studied since the 1960s and have benefitted from the development of refutation methods and filtering algorithms, stemming from the interval analysis and interval constraint programming communities. It is of the utmost importance: i) to compute sharp enclosures of the objective function and the constraints on a given subdomain; ii) to find a good approximation (an upper bound) of the global minimum. State-of-the-art solvers are generally integrative methods, that is they embed local optimization algorithms to compute a good upper bound of the global minimum over each subspace.
    [Show full text]
  • Scale up Bayesian Networks Learning Dissertation Proposal
    Scale Up Bayesian Networks Learning Dissertation Proposal Xiannian Fan [email protected] March 2015 Abstract Bayesian networks are widely used graphical models which represent uncertain rela- tions between the random variables in a domain compactly and intuitively. The first step of applying Bayesian networks to real-word problems typically requires building the network structure. Among others, optimal structure learning via score-and-search has become an active research topic in recent years. In this context, a scoring function is used to measure the goodness of fit of a structure to the data, and the goal is to find the structure which optimizes the scoring function. The problem has been shown to be NP-hard. This pro- posal focuses on scaling up structure learning algorithms. Two potential directions are preliminarily explored. One is to tighten the bounds; we tighten the lower bound by us- ing more informed variable groupings when creating the heuristics. and tighten the upper bound using anytime learning algorithm. The other is to prune the search space by extract- ing constraints directly from data. Our preliminary results show that the two directions can significantly improve the efficiency and scalability of heuristics search-based structure learning algorithms, which gives us strong reasons to follow these directions in the future. Professor: Dr. Changhe Yuan Signature: Date: 03-11-2015 Professor: Dr. Liang Huang Signature: Date: 03-11-2015 Professor: Dr. Andrew Rosenberg Signature: Date: 03-11-2015 Professor: Dr.John Paisley Signature: Date: 03-11-2015 Advisor: Dr. Changhe Yuan 1 Contents 1 Introduction 3 1.1 Notation and Termimology .
    [Show full text]
  • SI 335, Unit 5: Graph Search
    SI 335, Unit 5: Graph Search Daniel S. Roche ([email protected]) Spring 2016 1 Graphs NOTE: All this section should be review from Data Structures, IC 312. Feel free to skip to the next section of the notes if you feel pretty solid on this. Graphs (sometimes called “networks”) are an extremely useful and versatile way of representing information. At its core, a graph is a collection of items (the nodes) and relationships between them (edges). Here is a very small sampling of different kinds of information that can be represented with a graph: • Cities in a country or continent and the highways that connect them. Can be used by services like Google Maps to tell you the fastest way to get somewhere. • People in an organization and the relationships between them • (“boss”, “acquaintance”, “friend”, etc.). • Computers and servers in a network and the connections between them. Problems we might ask are how to get a message from one machine to another and how to best configure the network for redundancy if one machine goes down. • Web pages and the hyperlinks between them • Dependencies in a Makefile • Scheduling tasks given some constraints (like “A has to happen after B” or “A and B can’t happen simultaneously”.) Because of this, graphs rightfully belong to the class of basic computational structures alongside other things like numbers, lists, and collections. We’ll examine a few of the most important algorithms and problems with graphs but there are many, many more that arise in all kinds of varied circumstances. 1.1 Definitions and Terminology A graph G = (V, E) is a tuple of “nodes” or “vertices” in the set V, and “edges” in the set E that connect the vertices.
    [Show full text]