-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 11
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Terminate IDFSearch
when two consecutive depths reach the same number of moves
#94
Comments
IDFSearch
when two depths reach the same number of movesIDFSearch
when two consecutive depths reach the same number of moves
A little unrelated, but shouldn't this be called IDAStarSearch or something similar? Iterative deepening search with pruning tables is IDA*, right? |
I don't know that we have enough heuristics in place to qualify as A*? @rokicki probably knows more. |
Right. What we do is pretty basic IDFS. We do have a heuristic, but we do
not order
the children by that heuristic and "explore most promising children first"
so I don't
think it really qualifies as IDA*.
I'd be happy to look at references that suggest I'm wrong, however.
…On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 3:07 PM Lucas Garron ***@***.***> wrote:
A little unrelated, but shouldn't this be called IDAStarSearch or
something similar? Iterative deepening search with pruning tables is IDA*,
right?
I don't know that we have enough heuristics in place to qualify as A*?
@rokicki <https://github.com/rokicki> probably knows more.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#94 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAMOLS3CYSQPZMQ3HQ2WL2D2KWKB3AVCNFSM6AAAAABVCEVY3WVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDKOJRGI4DOMRVGU>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
@rokicki and I talked about this some time earlier, and we concluded that the IDA* was indeed the correct terminology for what C++ twsearch uses (see https://cubing-org.slack.com/archives/CKD5E53A4/p1737658381579609). Is there any specific reason why Rust twsearch uses IDFS instead of IDA*? Your |
Yes, the reason cited above. It was named before you and @rokicki talked. :P Additionally, the |
Sorry, let me be more specific in what I mean. Rust twsearch seems to do the recursive step of IDA*.
This matches the IDA* wikipedia's pseudocode:
So that seems to be fine and dandy. However, Rust twsearch does not seem to relay the minimum heuristic information upstream:
Once again from wikipedia's pseudocode:
I brought my above concern above specifically because of this observation. I interpreted the code as just a slightly faster version of IDFS rather then IDA*, hence why I proclaimed that in the above. |
If the the code were implemented from an algorithm or spec, I suspect we would have more meaningful answers to your questions. But there is a lot of design work in that code to be done, and therefore a lot of missing features. If you want to tackle passing up the heuristic feel free, else I'm not sure when we'd have time to get to experimenting with it. |
We do the first level. (Regarding moves on the same axis.) That’s almost
all the benefit.
- https://cube20.org/ <http://cube20.org/> - https://golly.sf.net/
<http://golly.sf.net/> - https://alpha.twizzle.net/
/ -
…On Sun, Feb 23, 2025 at 10:47 AM Lucas Garron ***@***.***> wrote:
If the the code were implemented from an algorithm or spec, I suspect we
would have more meaningful answers to your questions.
But there is a *lot* of design work in that code to be done, and
therefore a lot of missing features.
If you want to tackle passing up the heuristic feel free, else I'm not
sure when we'd have time to get to experimenting with it.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#94 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAMOLSYR4R3DTAFW5REEHKD2RIJS7AVCNFSM6AAAAABVCEVY3WVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDMNZXGA2TOOJTGQ>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
[image: lgarron]*lgarron* left a comment (cubing/twsearch#94)
<#94 (comment)>
If the the code were implemented from an algorithm or spec, I suspect we
would have more meaningful answers to your questions.
But there is a *lot* of design work in that code to be done, and
therefore a lot of missing features.
If you want to tackle passing up the heuristic feel free, else I'm not
sure when we'd have time to get to experimenting with it.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#94 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAMOLSYR4R3DTAFW5REEHKD2RIJS7AVCNFSM6AAAAABVCEVY3WVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDMNZXGA2TOOJTGQ>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
This can help prevent infinite search in situations where a solution was provided but the state space is small enough to enumerate during normal search.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: