CS621: Artificial Intelligence
-
Upload
erin-fletcher -
Category
Documents
-
view
32 -
download
0
description
Transcript of CS621: Artificial Intelligence
CS621: Artificial Intelligence
Pushpak BhattacharyyaCSE Dept., IIT Bombay
Lecture 7: Traveling Salesman Problem as search; Simulated Annealing; how to read
research papers
4-city TSP
1
34
2
d12
d23
d34
d31
d14
d23
dij not necessarilyEqual to dji
TSP: State Representation
10004
00103
01002
00011
4321Position
(α)City (i) `i’ varies over cities
`α’ varies over positions
Objective Functions
Minimize F = F1 + F2
F1 = k1 ∑i ((∑α xiα) – 1)2 + k2 ∑β ((∑j xjβ) – 1)2
F2 = k3 ∑i ∑j ∑α dij (xiα xi,α+1 + xiα xi,α-1)
1(a) 1(b)
2
Metropolis Algorithm
1) Initialize: Start with a random state matrix S. Compute the objective function value at S. Call this the energy of the state E(S).
2) The states are transformed by the application of an operator (for TSP, inversion of adjacent cities)
3) Compute change the energy ΔE=Enew-Eold
4) if ΔE <=0, accept the new state Snew
5) Else, accept Snew with probability
(‘T’ is the “temperature” and KB, the Boltzmann constant)
TK
stateE
Be)(
How to read research papers
Before that: How to read a book
1940 classic by Mortimer Adler Revised and coauthored by Charles
Van Doren in 1972 Guidelines for critically reading
good and great books of any tradition
Three types of Knowledge Practical
though teachable, cannot be truly mastered without experience
Informational that only informational knowledge can be
gained by one whose understanding equals the author's
Comprehensive comprehension (insight) is best learned
from who first achieved said understanding — an "original communication
Three Approaches to Reading (non-fiction) Structural
Understanding the structure and purpose of the book Determining the basic topic and type of the book Distinguish between practical and theoretical books, as well as
determining the field of study that the book addresses. Divisions in the book, and that these are not restricted to the divisions
laid out in the table of contents. Lastly, What problems the author is trying to solve.
Interpretative Constructing the author's arguments Requires the reader to note and understand any special phrases and
terms Find and work to understand each proposition that the author
advances, as well as the author's support for those propositions. Syntopical
Judge the book's merit and accuracy AKA, Structure-Proposition-Evaluation (SPE) method
VERY PRACTICALFrom Wikihow!
Steps Find a book Buy/rent it and take it home Settle into a comfortable chair or get
comfortable on the couch Be calm and alert Start the book by turning the pages Read and enjoy it Close book
Warnings
Do not forget about your daily life. Check the time and take a break every once in a while.
If the book is rented, then be very careful to not damage it, and return it on time.
You will pay for lateness, and is not fun. If you read the book in a bus/subway,
then be careful to not miss the station where you should go off.
Reading research papers
From Philip W. Fonghttp://www2.cs.uregina.ca/~pwlfong/CS499/reading-
paper.pdf
Comprehension: what does the paper say
A common pitfall for a beginner is to focus solely on the technicalities
Technical content is no way the only focus of a careful reading
Question-1: What is the research problem the paper attempts to address?
What is the motivation of the research work?
Is there a crisis in the research field that the paper attempts to resolve?
Is the research work attempting to overcome the weaknesses of existing approaches?
Is an existing research paradigm challenged?
In short, what is the niche of the paper?
How do the authors substantiate their claims? What is the methodology adopted to
substantiate the claims? What is the argument of the paper? What are the major theorems? What experiments are conducted? Data
analyses? Simulations? Benchmarks? User studies? Case studies? Examples?
In short, what makes the claims scientific (as opposed to being mere opinions (science as opposed to science fiction)
What are the conclusions? What have we learned from the paper? Shall the standard practice of the field
be changed as a result of the new findings? Is the result generalizable? Can the result be applied to other areas
of the field? What are the open problems? In short, what are the lessons one can
learn from the paper?
VVIMP
Look first to the abstract for answers to previous questions The paper should be an elaboration of
the abstract. Every good paper tells a story
ask yourself, “What is the plot?” The four questions listed above make
up a plot structure
Evaluation
An integral component of scholarship: critical of scientific claims
Fancy claims are usually easy to make but difficult to substantiate]
Solid scholarship involves careful validation of scientific claims
Reading research paper is therefore an exercise of critical thinking
Evaluation question-1: Is the research problem significant
Is the work scratching minor itches?
Are the authors solving artificial problems
Does the work enable practical applications, deepen understanding, or explore new design space?
Are the contributions significant?
Is the paper worth reading? Are the authors simply repeating the
state of the art? Are there real surprises? Are the authors aware of the relation
of their work to existing literature? Is the paper addressing a well-known
open problem?
Are the claims valid?
Have the authors been cutting corners (intentionally or unintentionally)?
Has the right theorem been proven? Errors in proofs? Problematic experimental setup? Confounding factors? Unrealistic, artificial benchmarks? Comparing apples and oranges? Methodological misunderstanding?
Do the numbers add up? Are the generalizations valid? Are the claims modest enough?
Synthesis: your own research agenda coming from the reading of the paper
Creativity does not arise from the void. Interacting with the scholarly community
through reading research papers is one of the most effective way for generating novel research agendas
When you read a research paper, you should see it as an opportunity for you to come up with new research projects
Cautionary note Be very skeptical of work that is so “novel”
that it bears no relation to any existing work, builds upon no existing paradigm, and yet addresses a research problem so significant
that it promises to transform the world Such are the signs that the author might not
be aware of existing literature on the topic Repeat of work done decades ago?
Questions to help formulate research agenda What is the crux of the research problem? What are some alternative approaches to address the
research problem? What is a better way to substantiate the claim of the
authors? What is a good argument against the case made by the
authors? How can the research results be improved? Can the research results be applied to another context? What are the open problems raised by this work? Bottomline: Can we do better than the authors?