Batch Informed Trees (BIT*): Sampling-based Optimal Planning via the Heuristically Guided Search of Implicit Random Geometric Graphs

In this paper, we present Batch Informed Trees (BIT*), a planning algorithm based on unifying graph- and sampling-based planning techniques. By recognizing that a set of samples describes an implicit random geometric graph (RGG), we are able to combine the efficient ordered nature of graph-based techniques, such as A*, with the anytime scalability of sampling-based algorithms, such as Rapidly-exploring Random Trees (RRT). BIT* uses a heuristic to efficiently search a series of increasingly dense implicit RGGs while reusing previous information. It can be viewed as an extension of incremental graph-search techniques, such as Lifelong Planning A* (LPA*), to continuous problem domains as well as a generalization of existing sampling-based optimal planners. It is shown that it is probabilistically complete and asymptotically optimal. We demonstrate the utility of BIT* on simulated random worlds in $\mathbb{R}^2$ and $\mathbb{R}^8$ and manipulation problems on CMU's HERB, a 14-DOF two-armed robot. On these problems, BIT* finds better solutions faster than RRT, RRT*, Informed RRT*, and Fast Marching Trees (FMT*) with faster anytime convergence towards the optimum, especially in high dimensions.Comment: 8 Pages. 6 Figures. Video available at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQIoCC48gp

Batch Informed Trees (BIT*): Informed Asymptotically Optimal Anytime Search

Path planning in robotics often requires finding high-quality solutions to continuously valued and/or high-dimensional problems. These problems are challenging and most planning algorithms instead solve simplified approximations. Popular approximations include graphs and random samples, as respectively used by informed graph-based searches and anytime sampling-based planners. Informed graph-based searches, such as A*, traditionally use heuristics to search a priori graphs in order of potential solution quality. This makes their search efficient but leaves their performance dependent on the chosen approximation. If its resolution is too low then they may not find a (suitable) solution but if it is too high then they may take a prohibitively long time to do so. Anytime sampling-based planners, such as RRT*, traditionally use random sampling to approximate the problem domain incrementally. This allows them to increase resolution until a suitable solution is found but makes their search dependent on the order of approximation. Arbitrary sequences of random samples approximate the problem domain in every direction simultaneously and but may be prohibitively inefficient at containing a solution. This paper unifies and extends these two approaches to develop Batch Informed Trees (BIT*), an informed, anytime sampling-based planner. BIT* solves continuous path planning problems efficiently by using sampling and heuristics to alternately approximate and search the problem domain. Its search is ordered by potential solution quality, as in A*, and its approximation improves indefinitely with additional computational time, as in RRT*. It is shown analytically to be almost-surely asymptotically optimal and experimentally to outperform existing sampling-based planners, especially on high-dimensional planning problems.Comment: International Journal of Robotics Research (IJRR). 32 Pages. 16 Figure

An Atypical Survey of Typical-Case Heuristic Algorithms

Heuristic approaches often do so well that they seem to pretty much always give the right answer. How close can heuristic algorithms get to always giving the right answer, without inducing seismic complexity-theoretic consequences? This article first discusses how a series of results by Berman, Buhrman, Hartmanis, Homer, Longpr\'{e}, Ogiwara, Sch\"{o}ening, and Watanabe, from the early 1970s through the early 1990s, explicitly or implicitly limited how well heuristic algorithms can do on NP-hard problems. In particular, many desirable levels of heuristic success cannot be obtained unless severe, highly unlikely complexity class collapses occur. Second, we survey work initiated by Goldreich and Wigderson, who showed how under plausible assumptions deterministic heuristics for randomized computation can achieve a very high frequency of correctness. Finally, we consider formal ways in which theory can help explain the effectiveness of heuristics that solve NP-hard problems in practice.Comment: This article is currently scheduled to appear in the December 2012 issue of SIGACT New

Black-Box Complexity: Breaking the O(nlog⁡n)O(n \log n) Barrier of LeadingOnes

We show that the unrestricted black-box complexity of the $n$-dimensional XOR- and permutation-invariant LeadingOnes function class is $O(n \log (n) / \log \log n)$. This shows that the recent natural looking $O(n\log n)$ bound is not tight. The black-box optimization algorithm leading to this bound can be implemented in a way that only 3-ary unbiased variation operators are used. Hence our bound is also valid for the unbiased black-box complexity recently introduced by Lehre and Witt (GECCO 2010). The bound also remains valid if we impose the additional restriction that the black-box algorithm does not have access to the objective values but only to their relative order (ranking-based black-box complexity).Comment: 12 pages, to appear in the Proc. of Artificial Evolution 2011, LNCS 7401, Springer, 2012. For the unrestricted black-box complexity of LeadingOnes there is now a tight $\Theta(n \log\log n)$ bound, cf. http://eccc.hpi-web.de/report/2012/087

Towards a Theory-Guided Benchmarking Suite for Discrete Black-Box Optimization Heuristics: Profiling (1+λ)(1+\lambda) EA Variants on OneMax and LeadingOnes

Theoretical and empirical research on evolutionary computation methods complement each other by providing two fundamentally different approaches towards a better understanding of black-box optimization heuristics. In discrete optimization, both streams developed rather independently of each other, but we observe today an increasing interest in reconciling these two sub-branches. In continuous optimization, the COCO (COmparing Continuous Optimisers) benchmarking suite has established itself as an important platform that theoreticians and practitioners use to exchange research ideas and questions. No widely accepted equivalent exists in the research domain of discrete black-box optimization. Marking an important step towards filling this gap, we adjust the COCO software to pseudo-Boolean optimization problems, and obtain from this a benchmarking environment that allows a fine-grained empirical analysis of discrete black-box heuristics. In this documentation we demonstrate how this test bed can be used to profile the performance of evolutionary algorithms. More concretely, we study the optimization behavior of several $(1+\lambda)$ EA variants on the two benchmark problems OneMax and LeadingOnes. This comparison motivates a refined analysis for the optimization time of the $(1+\lambda)$ EA on LeadingOnes