Local Search and Optimization

(Based on slides of Stuart Russell, ... )

 Path vs. State Optimization
• Previous lecture: path to goal is solution to problem
– sequence of action to reach goal state from start state
– state is a partial configuration
– systematic exploration of search space, e.g., DFS, BFS.
– IDS is not systematic, but mimics a DFS (which is systematic) in a
memory efficient way
 Path vs. State Optimization
• Previous lecture: path to goal is solution to problem
– state is a partial configuration
– systematic exploration of search space.
• This lecture: a state is solution to problem (good or bad)
– for some problems path is irrelevant.
– E.g., 8-queens
– search in the path space
– not systematic

5
 Path vs. State Optimization
• Previous lecture: path to goal is solution to problem
– state is a partial configuration
– systematic exploration of search space.
• This lecture: a state is solution to problem (good or bad)
– for some problems path is irrelevant.
– E.g., 8-queens
– search in the path space
– not systematic

• Different algorithms can be used

– Depth First Branch and Bound
– Local search
5
 Satisfaction vs. Optimization
Goal
Optimization
Satisfaction
reach the goal node optimize(objective fn)
Constraint satisfaction, Constraint Optimization
e.g., 8-queens

6
 Satisfaction vs. Optimization
Goal
Optimization
Satisfaction
reach the goal node optimize(objective fn)
Constraint satisfaction, Constraint Optimization
e.g., 8-queens

Satisfaction problem can be formulated as an optimization problem:

maximize the no. of constraints satisfied

We can go back and forth between the two problems

Typically in the same complexity class

6
 Local search and optimization
• Local search
– Keep track of single current state
– Move only to neighboring states
– Ignore paths

• Advantages:
– Use very little memory
– Can often find reasonable solutions in large or infinite (continuous)
state spaces.

• “Pure optimization” problems

– All states have an objective function
– Goal is to find state with max (or min) objective value
– Does not quite fit into path-cost/goal-state formulation
– Local search can do quite well on these problems.
7
 Example: n-queens
• Put n queens on an n x n board with no two
queens on the same row, column, or diagonal

• Is it a satisfaction problem or optimization?

8
 8-queens problem: as optimization

• Need to convert to an optimization problem

• h = number of pairs of queens that are attacking each other
• h = 17 for the above state
9
 Search Space
• State
– All 8 queens on the board in some configuration

• Successor function
– move a single queen to another square in the same column.

• Example of a heuristic function h(n):

– the number of pairs of queens that are attacking each
other
– (so we want to minimize this) 10
 8-queens problem: as optimization

• How to reach this solution?

11
 Trivial Algorithms
• Random Sampling
– Generate a state randomly

• Random Walk
– Randomly pick a neighbor of the current state

• Both algorithms asymptotically complete.

12
 Hill-climbing search: 8-queens problem

• Maximization problem:
Optimization function h = number of pairs of queens that are
NOT attacking each other
Hill-climbing search
Hill-climbing (Greedy Local Search)
max version
function HILL-CLIMBING( problem) return a state that is a local maximum
input: problem, a problem
local variables: current, a node.
neighbor, a node.

current  MAKE-NODE(INITIAL-STATE[problem])
loop do
neighbor  a highest valued successor of current
if VALUE [neighbor] ≤ VALUE[current] then return STATE[current]
current  neighbor

min version will reverse inequalities and look for

lowest valued successor
13
 Hill-climbing search
• “a loop that continuously moves towards increasing value”
– terminates when a peak is reached
– also known as greedy local search
• Value can be either
– Objective function value
– Heuristic function value (minimized)

• Hill climbing does not look ahead of the immediate neighbors

• Can randomly choose among the set of best successors
– if multiple have the best value

• “climbing Mount Everest - in a thick fog - with amnesia”

Finding the state with max h - by searching only the neighboring states - without storing the path to current state from start state

14
 “Landscape” of search

Hill Climbing gets stuck in local minima

depending on?
15
 Hill-climbing on 8-queens
• Randomly generated 8-queens starting states…
• 14% the time it solves the problem
• 86% of the time it get stuck at a local minimum

• However…
– Takes only 4 steps on average when it succeeds
– And 3 on average when it gets stuck
– (for a state space with 8^8 =~17 million states)
– Local search is fast 16
 Hill Climbing Drawbacks

• Local maxima

• Plateaus

• Diagonal ridges
17
 Escaping Shoulders: Sideways Move
• If no downhill (uphill) moves, allow sideways moves
in hope that algorithm can escape
– Need to place a limit on the possible number of sideways
moves to avoid infinite loops (not systematic)
• For 8-queens
– Now allow sideways moves with a limit of 100
– Raises percentage of problem instances solved from 14 to
94%

– However….
• 21 steps for every successful solution
• 64 for each failure
18
 Tabu Search
• prevent returning quickly to the same state
• Keep fixed length queue (“tabu list”)
• add most recent state to queue; drop oldest
• Never make the step that is currently tabu’ed

• Properties:
– As the size of the tabu list grows, hill-climbing will
asymptotically become “non-redundant” (won’t look at the
same state twice)
– In practice, a reasonable sized tabu list (say 100 or so)
improves the performance of hill climbing in many problems19
 Escaping Shoulders/local Optima
Enforced Hill Climbing
• Perform breadth first search from a local optima
– to find the next state with better h function

• Typically,
– prolonged periods of exhaustive search
– bridged by relatively quick periods of hill-climbing

• Middle ground b/w local and systematic search

20
 Hill-climbing: stochastic variations
• Stochastic hill-climbing
– Random selection among the uphill moves.
– The selection probability can vary with the steepness of the uphill move.

• To avoid getting stuck in local minima

– Random-walk hill-climbing
– Random-restart hill-climbing
– Hill-climbing with both

21
 Hill Climbing with random walk
When the state-space landscape has local
minima, any search that moves only in the
greedy direction cannot be complete
Random walk, on the other hand, is
asymptotically complete
Idea: Put random walk into greedy hill-climbing
• At each step do one of the two
– Greedy: With prob p move to the neighbor with largest value
– Random: With prob 1-p move to a random neighbor
– Increase p over iterations 22
 Hill-climbing with random restarts
• If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again!
• Different variations
– For each restart: run until termination vs. run for a fixed time

Run until termination:

restart when arrived at a local optimum

Run for a fixed time:

restart after a few steps even if not arrived at local optimum
e.g., "8-queens with sideways moves": restart after 40 steps

– Run a fixed number of restarts or run indefinitely

23
 Hill-climbing with random restarts
• Analysis
– Say each search has probability p of success
• E.g., for 8-queens, p = 0.14 with no sideways moves

– Expected number of restarts?

– Expected number of steps taken?

23
 Hill-climbing with random restarts
• Analysis
– Say each search has probability p of success
• E.g., for 8-queens, p = 0.14 with no sideways moves

– Expected number of restarts? = 1/p = 7

– Expected number of steps taken?

= 6x3 + 4 = 22

23
 Hill-climbing with both
• At each step do one of the three
– Greedy: move to the neighbor with largest value
– Random Walk: move to a random neighbor
– Random Restart: Resample a new current state

24
 Simulated Annealing
• Simulated Annealing = physics inspired twist on random walk
• Basic ideas:
– like hill-climbing identify the quality of the local improvements
– instead of picking the best move, pick one randomly
– say the change in objective function is d
– if d is positive, then move to that state
– otherwise:
• move to this state with probability proportional to d
• thus: worse moves (very large negative d) are executed less often
– however, there is always a chance of escaping from local maxima
– over time, make it less likely to accept locally bad moves
– (Can also make the size of the move random as well, i.e., allow “large”
steps in state space)

25
 Simulated annealing
function SIMULATED-ANNEALING( problem, schedule) return a solution state
input: problem, a problem
schedule, a mapping from time to temperature
local variables: current, a node.
next, a node.
T, a “temperature” controlling the prob. of downward steps

current  MAKE-NODE(INITIAL-STATE[problem])
for t  1 to ∞ do
T  schedule[t]
if T = 0 then return current
next  a randomly selected successor of current
∆E  VALUE[next] - VALUE[current]
if ∆E > 0 then current  next
else current  next only with probability e∆E /T
26
 Temperature T
• high T: probability of “locally bad” move is higher
• low T: probability of “locally bad” move is lower
• typically, T is decreased as the algorithm runs longer
• i.e., there is a “temperature schedule”

27
Physical Interpretation of Simulated Annealing
• A Physical Analogy:
• imagine letting a ball roll downhill on the function surface
– this is like hill-climbing (for minimization)
• now imagine shaking the surface, while the ball rolls,
gradually reducing the amount of shaking
– this is like simulated annealing

• Annealing = physical process of cooling a liquid or metal

until particles achieve a certain frozen crystal state
• simulated annealing:
– free variables are like particles
– seek “low energy” (high quality) configuration
– slowly reducing temp. T with particles moving around randomly
28
Simulated Annealing in Practice
– method proposed in 1983 by IBM researchers for
solving VLSI layout problems (Kirkpatrick et al,
Science, 220:671-680, 1983).
• theoretically will always find the global optimum

– Other applications: Traveling salesman, Graph

partitioning, Graph coloring, Scheduling, Facility
Layout, Image Processing, …

– useful for some problems, but can be very slow

• slowness comes about because T must be decreased
very gradually to retain optimality
29
 Local beam search
• Idea: Keeping only one node in memory is an
extreme reaction to memory problems.

• Keep track of k states instead of one

– Initially: k randomly selected states
– Next: determine all successors of k states
– If any of successors is goal  finished
– Else select k best from successors and repeat

30
 Local Beam Search (contd)
• Not the same as k random-start searches run in parallel!
• Searches that find good states recruit other searches to
join them

• Problem: quite often, all k states end up on same local hill

• Idea: Stochastic beam search
– Choose k successors randomly, biased towards good ones

• Observe the close analogy to natural selection!

31
 Genetic algorithms
• Twist on Local Search: successor is generated by combining two parent states

• A state is represented as a string over a finite alphabet (e.g. binary)

– 8-queens
• State = position of 8 queens each in a column

• Start with k randomly generated states (population)

• Evaluation function (fitness function):

– Higher values for better states.
– Opposite to heuristic function, e.g., # non-attacking pairs in 8-queens

• Produce the next generation of states by “simulated evolution”

– Random selection
– Crossover
– Random mutation

34
 8
7
6 String representation
16257483
5
4
3
2
1

Can we evolve 8-queens through genetic algorithms?

35
 Genetic algorithms

4 states for 2 pairs of 2 states New states Random

8-queens randomly selected based after crossover mutation
problem on fitness. Random applied
crossover points selected

• Fitness function: number of non-attacking pairs of queens (min = 0, max =

8 × 7/2 = 28)
• 24/(24+23+20+11) = 31%
• 23/(24+23+20+11) = 29% etc
37
 Genetic algorithms

Has the effect of “jumping” to a completely different new

part of the search space (quite non-local)

38
 Comments on Genetic Algorithms
• Genetic algorithm is a variant of “stochastic beam search”

• Positive points
– Random exploration can find solutions that local search can’t
• (via crossover primarily)
– Appealing connection to human evolution
• “neural” networks, and “genetic” algorithms are metaphors!

42
 Comments on Genetic Algorithms

• Negative points
– Large number of “tunable” parameters
• Difficult to replicate performance from one problem to another
– Lack of good empirical studies comparing to simpler methods
– Useful on some (small?) set of problems but no convincing evidence
that GAs are better than hill-climbing w/random restarts in general

42
 Comments on Genetic Algorithms

• Question
– are GAs really optimizing the individual fitness function? Mixability?
– why should only mixing high scoring genes provide better results?

42
Optimization of Continuous Functions
• Discretization
– use hill-climbing

• Gradient descent
– make a move in the direction of the gradient
• gradients: closed form or empirical

43
44
 Gradient Descent
Assume we have a continuous function: f(x1,x2,…,xN)
and we want minimize over continuous variables X1,X2,..,Xn

1. Compute the gradients for all i: f(x1,x2,…,xN) /xi

2. Take a small step downhill in the direction of the gradient:

xi  xi - λf(x1,x2,…,xN) /xi

3. Repeat.

• How to select λ
– Line search: successively double
– until f starts to increase again
45