Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [aima-talk] about A* search

Expand Messages
  • savastinuk
    This makes sense. : ) Can you also explain consistent? Or, better yet, INconsistent? Still talking A*. thanks.... Susan _____ From: aima-talk@yahoogroups.com
    Message 1 of 9 , Sep 27, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      This makes sense. : )
       
      Can you also explain consistent? Or, better yet, INconsistent?
      Still talking A*.
       
      thanks....
      Susan


      From: aima-talk@yahoogroups.com [mailto:aima-talk@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of The Geek
      Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 6:03 PM
      To: aima-talk@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [aima-talk] about A* search

      I think my version is different from yours, but I
      assume you're talking about the A* search algorithm.

      The proof is in the book a page or so later, but  look
      at it the other way for a second - if the path
      estimate were sometimes too high, then based on the
      inflated estimate you might ignore a path that would
      have turned out to have a "short cut" in it.  But by
      guaranteeing that the actual cost will always be more
      than your estimate, you're guaranteed never to ignore
      a short cut. 

      To put it another way, with an admissible heuristic
      any unexplored path is guaranteed to be worse than or
      equal to it's estimate - never better.  Thus when you
      actually explore a path, you're guaranteed that it's
      cost will only get worse.  So if you've found an
      actual path solution that's equal to or better than
      the best unexplored path estimates, the actual path
      you've found is guaranteed to be the best because the
      unexplored paths can only get more costly when they're
      explored.

      I hope that made sense.

      Rob G.

      --- lwudong <wudongs@...> wrote:

      > In page97, line 7:
      > The restriction is to choose an h function that
      > never overestimates
      > the cost to reach the goal. Such an h is called an
      > admissible
      > heuristic. Admissible heuristics are by nature
      > optimistic, because
      > they think the cost of solving the problem is less
      > than it actually is.
      >
      > Can anyone give me more explanation why it always
      > gets the optimial
      > result when it never overestimates the total cost.
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >



                 
      __________________________________
      Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
      http://mail.yahoo.com


    • The Geek
      Consistency of heuristics is a little more tricky to explain, since every consistent one is also admissible. If you re not from the U.S., I ll apologize in
      Message 2 of 9 , Sep 27, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Consistency of heuristics is a little more tricky to
        explain, since every consistent one is also
        admissible.

        If you're not from the U.S., I'll apologize in advance
        for the following example....

        Lets say you're trying to get from New York to L.A. by
        car - forget the fact that it would now cost you a
        small fortune to do so. A consistent heuristic is one
        where the estimate to get from New York to L.A. must
        be equal to or smaller than the actual cost to get
        from New York to any other city **plus** the estimate
        to get from that city to L.A. In other words, if you
        drive from New York to Chicago, then estimate the
        distance from Chicago to L.A. you're not supposed to
        get a smaller answer than your original estimate. If
        you use straight-line distance, it's easy to see this
        is consistent.

        Admissible heurstics must guarantee the estimate is no
        larger than the actual cost turns out to be.
        Consistent heuristics must also guarantee the "revised
        estimate" (the sum of the actual distance traveled so
        far plus the estimate of what you've got remaining)
        never goes down as you explore the path.

        You have to get kind of goofy to find things that are
        admissible but not consistent - taking the
        straight-line distance divided by the number of
        letters in the city name for example. The estimate is
        guaranteed to be low (since it's always less than the
        straight-line distance), and thus is admissible. When
        you start at New York your estimate would be 2400/7 =
        342.86. If you drove 95 miles to Philadelphia, you're
        estimate from Philadelphia to L.A. would be 2320 / 12
        = 193.33. Adding that back to the 95 miles you drove
        from New York we see that we now think we can get from
        New York to L.A. by way of Philadelphia for an
        estimated cost of 193.33 + 95 = 288.33, less than our
        original estimate of 342.86, thus demonstrating that
        the heuristic is not consistent.

        Rob G.

        --- savastinuk <minnie@...> wrote:

        > This makes sense. : )
        >
        > Can you also explain consistent? Or, better yet,
        > INconsistent?
        > Still talking A*.
        >
        > thanks....
        > Susan
        >
        >
        > _____
        >
        > From: aima-talk@yahoogroups.com
        > [mailto:aima-talk@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
        > Of The Geek
        > Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 6:03 PM
        > To: aima-talk@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: Re: [aima-talk] about A* search
        >
        >
        > I think my version is different from yours, but I
        > assume you're talking about the A* search algorithm.
        >
        > The proof is in the book a page or so later, but
        > look
        > at it the other way for a second - if the path
        > estimate were sometimes too high, then based on the
        > inflated estimate you might ignore a path that would
        > have turned out to have a "short cut" in it. But by
        > guaranteeing that the actual cost will always be
        > more
        > than your estimate, you're guaranteed never to
        > ignore
        > a short cut.
        >
        > To put it another way, with an admissible heuristic
        > any unexplored path is guaranteed to be worse than
        > or
        > equal to it's estimate - never better. Thus when
        > you
        > actually explore a path, you're guaranteed that it's
        > cost will only get worse. So if you've found an
        > actual path solution that's equal to or better than
        > the best unexplored path estimates, the actual path
        > you've found is guaranteed to be the best because
        > the
        > unexplored paths can only get more costly when
        > they're
        > explored.
        >
        > I hope that made sense.
        >
        > Rob G.
        >
        > --- lwudong <wudongs@...> wrote:
        >
        > > In page97, line 7:
        > > The restriction is to choose an h function that
        > > never overestimates
        > > the cost to reach the goal. Such an h is called an
        > > admissible
        > > heuristic. Admissible heuristics are by nature
        > > optimistic, because
        > > they think the cost of solving the problem is less
        > > than it actually is.
        > >
        > > Can anyone give me more explanation why it always
        > > gets the optimial
        > > result when it never overestimates the total cost.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > __________________________________
        > Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
        > http://mail.yahoo.com
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > SPONSORED LINKS
        > Artificial
        >
        <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Artificial+intelligence+software&w1=Art
        >
        ificial+intelligence+software&w2=Artificial+intelligence+in+business&w3=Arti
        >
        ficial+intelligence&w4=Artificial+intelligence+introduction&c=4&s=150&.sig=Z
        > -KgstNm21fXWEV4ASPvHQ> intelligence software
        > Artificial
        >
        <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Artificial+intelligence+in+business&w1=
        >
        Artificial+intelligence+software&w2=Artificial+intelligence+in+business&w3=A
        >
        rtificial+intelligence&w4=Artificial+intelligence+introduction&c=4&s=150&.si
        > g=477uHvbluHUGZv4M3Wsnag> intelligence in business
        > Artificial
        >
        <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Artificial+intelligence&w1=Artificial+i
        >
        ntelligence+software&w2=Artificial+intelligence+in+business&w3=Artificial+in
        >
        telligence&w4=Artificial+intelligence+introduction&c=4&s=150&.sig=LONI6S4JBL
        > JohI0gb7t-Ug> intelligence
        > Artificial
        >
        <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Artificial+intelligence+introduction&w1
        >
        =Artificial+intelligence+software&w2=Artificial+intelligence+in+business&w3=
        >
        Artificial+intelligence&w4=Artificial+intelligence+introduction&c=4&s=150&.s
        > ig=n5dsIRz6BWbukAv5Ru4LcA> intelligence introduction
        >
        >
        > _____
        >
        > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
        >
        >
        >
        > * Visit your group "aima-talk
        > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aima-talk> " on the
        > web.
        >
        >
        > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > aima-talk-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >
        <mailto:aima-talk-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
        >
        >
        >
        > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
        > Yahoo! Terms of Service
        > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
        >
        >
        > _____
        >
        >
        >




        __________________________________
        Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
        http://mail.yahoo.com
      • mohammad assarian
        Dear Sir. When the path estimate is too high, this means that your h function has more less aware(h1) than time your path estimate has more accuracy(h2). when
        Message 3 of 9 , Sep 27, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear Sir.
          When the path estimate is too high, this means that your h function has more less
          aware(h1) than time your path estimate has more accuracy(h2). when h1 is less than h2 , it is natural that h1 develops nodes as number as h2 and perhaps more in your path.So it is possible for h1 that ignore a short cut path as compared with h2 .On the other hand heuristic fuctions have not guarantee for the best path but in more states act very good.
           
          M.Assarian
          The Geek <guihergeek61@...> wrote:
          I think my version is different from yours, but I
          assume you're talking about the A* search algorithm.

          The proof is in the book a page or so later, but  look
          at it the other way for a second - if the path
          estimate were sometimes too high, then based on the
          inflated estimate you might ignore a path that would
          have turned out to have a "short cut" in it.  But by
          guaranteeing that the actual cost will always be more
          than your estimate, you're guaranteed never to ignore
          a short cut. 

          To put it another way, with an admissible heuristic
          any unexplored path is guaranteed to be worse than or
          equal to it's estimate - never better.  Thus when you
          actually explore a path, you're guaranteed that it's
          cost will only get worse.  So if you've found an
          actual path solution that's equal to or better than
          the best unexplored path estimates, the actual path
          you've found is guaranteed to be the best because the
          unexplored paths can only get more costly when they're
          explored.

          I hope that made sense.

          Rob G.

          --- lwudong <wudongs@...> wrote:

          > In page97, line 7:
          > The restriction is to choose an h function that
          > never overestimates
          > the cost to reach the goal. Such an h is called an
          > admissible
          > heuristic. Admissible heuristics are by nature
          > optimistic, because
          > they think the cost of solving the problem is less
          > than it actually is.
          >
          > Can anyone give me more explanation why it always
          > gets the optimial
          > result when it never overestimates the total cost.
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >



                     
          __________________________________
          Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
          http://mail.yahoo.com


          __________________________________________________
          Do You Yahoo!?
          Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
          http://mail.yahoo.com

        • savastinuk
          Rob, Thanks so much! This helps me with a homework problem that I was completely stumped on. I ll cite your letter, as our teacher asked us to do if we get
          Message 4 of 9 , Sep 27, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Rob,
             
            Thanks so much! This helps me with a homework problem that I was completely stumped on. I'll cite your letter, as our teacher asked us to do if we get help with an answer.
             
            Your admissible but inconsistent trip example went right past where I live, near Philadelphia. : )
             
            regards,
            Susan


            From: aima-talk@yahoogroups.com [mailto:aima-talk@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of The Geek
            Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 1:46 PM
            To: aima-talk@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: RE: [aima-talk] about A* search

            Consistency of heuristics is a little more tricky to
            explain, since every consistent one is also
            admissible.

            If you're not from the U.S., I'll apologize in advance
            for the following example....

            Lets say you're trying to get from New York to L.A. by
            car - forget the fact that it would now cost you a
            small fortune to do so.  A consistent heuristic is one
            where the estimate to get from New York to L.A. must
            be equal to or smaller than the actual cost to get
            from New York to any other city **plus** the estimate
            to get from that city to L.A.  In other words, if you
            drive from New York to Chicago, then estimate the
            distance from Chicago to L.A. you're not supposed to
            get a smaller answer than your original estimate.  If
            you use straight-line distance, it's easy to see this
            is consistent.

            Admissible heurstics must guarantee the estimate is no
            larger than the actual cost turns out to be.
            Consistent heuristics must also guarantee the "revised
            estimate" (the sum of the actual distance traveled so
            far plus the estimate of what you've got remaining)
            never goes down as you explore the path.

            You have to get kind of goofy to find things that are
            admissible but not consistent - taking the
            straight-line distance divided by the number of
            letters in the city name for example.  The estimate is
            guaranteed to be low (since it's always less than the
            straight-line distance), and thus is admissible.  When
            you start at New York your estimate would be 2400/7 =
            342.86.  If you drove 95 miles to Philadelphia, you're
            estimate from Philadelphia to L.A. would be 2320 / 12
            = 193.33.  Adding that back to the 95 miles you drove
            from New York we see that we now think we can get from
            New York to L.A. by way of Philadelphia for an
            estimated cost of 193.33 + 95 = 288.33, less than our
            original estimate of 342.86, thus demonstrating that
            the heuristic is not consistent.

            Rob G.

            --- savastinuk <minnie@...> wrote:

            > This makes sense. : )

            > Can you also explain consistent? Or, better yet,
            > INconsistent?
            > Still talking A*.

            > thanks....
            > Susan
            >
            >
            >   _____ 
            >
            > From: aima-talk@yahoogroups.com
            > [mailto:aima-talk@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
            > Of The Geek
            > Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 6:03 PM
            > To: aima-talk@yahoogroups.com
            > Subject: Re: [aima-talk] about A* search
            >
            >
            > I think my version is different from yours, but I
            > assume you're talking about the A* search algorithm.
            >
            > The proof is in the book a page or so later, but
            > look
            > at it the other way for a second - if the path
            > estimate were sometimes too high, then based on the
            > inflated estimate you might ignore a path that would
            > have turned out to have a "short cut" in it.  But by
            > guaranteeing that the actual cost will always be
            > more
            > than your estimate, you're guaranteed never to
            > ignore
            > a short cut. 
            >
            > To put it another way, with an admissible heuristic
            > any unexplored path is guaranteed to be worse than
            > or
            > equal to it's estimate - never better.  Thus when
            > you
            > actually explore a path, you're guaranteed that it's
            > cost will only get worse.  So if you've found an
            > actual path solution that's equal to or better than
            > the best unexplored path estimates, the actual path
            > you've found is guaranteed to be the best because
            > the
            > unexplored paths can only get more costly when
            > they're
            > explored.
            >
            > I hope that made sense.
            >
            > Rob G.
            >
            > --- lwudong <wudongs@...> wrote:
            >
            > > In page97, line 7:
            > > The restriction is to choose an h function that
            > > never overestimates
            > > the cost to reach the goal. Such an h is called an
            > > admissible
            > > heuristic. Admissible heuristics are by nature
            > > optimistic, because
            > > they think the cost of solving the problem is less
            > > than it actually is.
            > >
            > > Can anyone give me more explanation why it always
            > > gets the optimial
            > > result when it never overestimates the total cost.
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            >
            >
            >
            >            
            > __________________________________
            > Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
            > http://mail.yahoo.com
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > SPONSORED LINKS
            > Artificial
            >
            <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Artificial+intelligence+software&w1=Art
            >
            ificial+intelligence+software&w2=Artificial+intelligence+in+business&w3=Arti
            >
            ficial+intelligence&w4=Artificial+intelligence+introduction&c=4&s=150&.sig=Z
            > -KgstNm21fXWEV4ASPvHQ> intelligence software
            > Artificial
            >
            <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Artificial+intelligence+in+business&w1=
            >
            Artificial+intelligence+software&w2=Artificial+intelligence+in+business&w3=A
            >
            rtificial+intelligence&w4=Artificial+intelligence+introduction&c=4&s=150&.si
            > g=477uHvbluHUGZv4M3Wsnag> intelligence in business
            > Artificial
            >
            <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Artificial+intelligence&w1=Artificial+i
            >
            ntelligence+software&w2=Artificial+intelligence+in+business&w3=Artificial+in
            >
            telligence&w4=Artificial+intelligence+introduction&c=4&s=150&.sig=LONI6S4JBL
            > JohI0gb7t-Ug> intelligence      
            > Artificial
            >
            <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Artificial+intelligence+introduction&w1
            >
            =Artificial+intelligence+software&w2=Artificial+intelligence+in+business&w3=
            >
            Artificial+intelligence&w4=Artificial+intelligence+introduction&c=4&s=150&.s
            > ig=n5dsIRz6BWbukAv5Ru4LcA> intelligence introduction
            >      
            >
            >   _____ 
            >
            > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
            >
            >
            >      
            > *      Visit your group "aima-talk
            > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aima-talk> " on the
            > web.
            >  
            >
            > *      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            >  aima-talk-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >
            <mailto:aima-talk-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
            >
            >  
            >
            > *      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
            > Yahoo! Terms of Service
            > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
            >
            >
            >   _____ 
            >
            >
            >



                       
            __________________________________
            Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
            http://mail.yahoo.com


          • [3!|_/\|_
            Does anyone have the implementation of A* search Of Romania Map or some other in prolog or any other reply urgently savastinuk wrote:
            Message 5 of 9 , Oct 11, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Does anyone have the implementation of A* search
              Of Romania Map or some other
              in prolog or any other
              reply urgently

              savastinuk <minnie@...> wrote:
              Rob,
               
              Thanks so much! This helps me with a homework problem that I was completely stumped on. I'll cite your letter, as our teacher asked us to do if we get help with an answer.
               
              Your admissible but inconsistent trip example went right past where I live, near Philadelphia. : )
               
              regards,
              Susan


              From: aima-talk@yahoogroups.com [mailto:aima-talk@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of The Geek
              Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 1:46 PM
              To: aima-talk@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: RE: [aima-talk] about A* search

              Consistency of heuristics is a little more tricky to
              explain, since every consistent one is also
              admissible.

              If you're not from the U.S., I'll apologize in advance
              for the following example....

              Lets say you're trying to get from New York to L.A. by
              car - forget the fact that it would now cost you a
              small fortune to do so.  A consistent heuristic is one
              where the estimate to get from New York to L.A. must
              be equal to or smaller than the actual cost to get
              from New York to any other city **plus** the estimate
              to get from that city to L.A.  In other words, if you
              drive from New York to Chicago, then estimate the
              distance from Chicago to L.A. you're not supposed to
              get a smaller answer than your original estimate.  If
              you use straight-line distance, it's easy to see this
              is consistent.

              Admissible heurstics must guarantee the estimate is no
              larger than the actual cost turns out to be.
              Consistent heuristics must also guarantee the "revised
              estimate" (the sum of the actual distance traveled so
              far plus the estimate of what you've got remaining)
              never goes down as you explore the path.

              You have to get kind of goofy to find things that are
              admissible but not consistent - taking the
              straight-line distance divided by the number of
              letters in the city name for example.  The estimate is
              guaranteed to be low (since it's always less than the
              straight-line distance), and thus is admissible.  When
              you start at New York your estimate would be 2400/7 =
              342.86.  If you drove 95 miles to Philadelphia, you're
              estimate from Philadelphia to L.A. would be 2320 / 12
              = 193.33.  Adding that back to the 95 miles you drove
              from New York we see that we now think we can get from
              New York to L.A. by way of Philadelphia for an
              estimated cost of 193.33 + 95 = 288.33, less than our
              original estimate of 342.86, thus demonstrating that
              the heuristic is not consistent.

              Rob G.

              --- savastinuk <minnie@...> wrote:

              > This makes sense. : )

              > Can you also explain consistent? Or, better yet,
              > INconsistent?
              > Still talking A*.

              > thanks....
              > Susan
              >
              >
              >   _____ 
              >
              > From: aima-talk@yahoogroups.com
              > [mailto:aima-talk@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
              > Of The Geek
              > Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 6:03 PM
              > To: aima-talk@yahoogroups.com
              > Subject: Re: [aima-talk] about A* search
              >
              >
              > I think my version is different from yours, but I
              > assume you're talking about the A* search algorithm.
              >
              > The proof is in the book a page or so later, but
              > look
              > at it the other way for a second - if the path
              > estimate were sometimes too high, then based on the
              > inflated estimate you might ignore a path that would
              > have turned out to have a "short cut" in it.  But by
              > guaranteeing that the actual cost will always be
              > more
              > than your estimate, you're guaranteed never to
              > ignore
              > a short cut. 
              >
              > To put it another way, with an admissible heuristic
              > any unexplored path is guaranteed to be worse than
              > or
              > equal to it's estimate - never better.  Thus when
              > you
              > actually explore a path, you're guaranteed that it's
              > cost will only get worse.  So if you've found an
              > actual path solution that's equal to or better than
              > the best unexplored path estimates, the actual path
              > you've found is guaranteed to be the best because
              > the
              > unexplored paths can only get more costly when
              > they're
              > explored.
              >
              > I hope that made sense.
              >
              > Rob G.
              >
              > --- lwudong <wudongs@...> wrote:
              >
              > > In page97, line 7:
              > > The restriction is to choose an h function that
              > > never overestimates
              > > the cost to reach the goal. Such an h is called an
              > > admissible
              > > heuristic. Admissible heuristics are by nature
              > > optimistic, because
              > > they think the cost of solving the problem is less
              > > than it actually is.
              > >
              > > Can anyone give me more explanation why it always
              > > gets the optimial
              > > result when it never overestimates the total cost.
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              >
              >
              >
              >            
              > __________________________________
              > Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
              > http://mail.yahoo.com
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > SPONSORED LINKS
              > Artificial
              >
              <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Artificial+intelligence+software&w1=Art
              >
              ificial+intelligence+software&w2=Artificial+intelligence+in+business&w3=Arti
              >
              ficial+intelligence&w4=Artificial+intelligence+introduction&c=4&s=150&.sig=Z
              > -KgstNm21fXWEV4ASPvHQ> intelligence software
              > Artificial
              >
              <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Artificial+intelligence+in+business&w1=
              >
              Artificial+intelligence+software&w2=Artificial+intelligence+in+business&w3=A
              >
              rtificial+intelligence&w4=Artificial+intelligence+introduction&c=4&s=150&.si
              > g=477uHvbluHUGZv4M3Wsnag> intelligence in business
              > Artificial
              >
              <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Artificial+intelligence&w1=Artificial+i
              >
              ntelligence+software&w2=Artificial+intelligence+in+business&w3=Artificial+in
              >
              telligence&w4=Artificial+intelligence+introduction&c=4&s=150&.sig=LONI6S4JBL
              > JohI0gb7t-Ug> intelligence      
              > Artificial
              >
              <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Artificial+intelligence+introduction&w1
              >
              =Artificial+intelligence+software&w2=Artificial+intelligence+in+business&w3=
              >
              Artificial+intelligence&w4=Artificial+intelligence+introduction&c=4&s=150&.s
              > ig=n5dsIRz6BWbukAv5Ru4LcA> intelligence introduction
              >      
              >
              >   _____ 
              >
              > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
              >
              >
              >      
              > *      Visit your group "aima-talk
              > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aima-talk> " on the
              > web.
              >  
              >
              > *      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              >  aima-talk-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              <mailto:aima-talk-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
              >
              >  
              >
              > *      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
              > Yahoo! Terms of Service
              > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
              >
              >
              >   _____ 
              >
              >
              >



                         
              __________________________________
              Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
              http://mail.yahoo.com




              [3 ! |_ /\ |_


              Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.

            • Ivan Villanueva
              ... If by any other you mean any other language, yes there are A* implementations in Lisp, Python and Java on the Aima webpage, and on my homepage in java
              Message 6 of 9 , Oct 13, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 01:44:06AM -0700, [3!|_/|_ wrote:
                > Does anyone have the implementation of A* search
                > Of Romania Map or some other
                > in prolog or any other

                If by "any other" you mean any other language, yes there are A* implementations
                in Lisp, Python and Java on the Aima webpage, and on my homepage in java at:
                www.artificialidea.com/index.php?page=my_programs

                Regards,
                Iván.
                --
                Ivan F. Villanueva B.
                The dream of intelligent machines: www.artificialidea.com
                Encrypted mail preferred.
                GPG Key Id: 3FDBF85F 2004-10-18 Ivan-Fernando Villanueva Barrio
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.