Jade Yu Cheng ICS 311 Homework 9 Oct 2, 2008

Similar documents
Multimedia Application Effective Support of Education

Learning Methods in Multilingual Speech Recognition

Artificial Neural Networks written examination

An Introduction to the Minimalist Program

The Interface between Phrasal and Functional Constraints

This scope and sequence assumes 160 days for instruction, divided among 15 units.

BMBF Project ROBUKOM: Robust Communication Networks

Prediction of Maximal Projection for Semantic Role Labeling

Writing Research Articles

Laboratorio di Intelligenza Artificiale e Robotica

MATHCOUNTS Rule Book LAST UPDATED. August NSBE JR. TOOLKIT National Programs Zone. 1

Seminar - Organic Computing

Decision Analysis. Decision-Making Problem. Decision Analysis. Part 1 Decision Analysis and Decision Tables. Decision Analysis, Part 1

RANKING AND UNRANKING LEFT SZILARD LANGUAGES. Erkki Mäkinen DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF TAMPERE REPORT A ER E P S I M S

ReinForest: Multi-Domain Dialogue Management Using Hierarchical Policies and Knowledge Ontology

OCR for Arabic using SIFT Descriptors With Online Failure Prediction

Lecture 10: Reinforcement Learning

EVOLVING POLICIES TO SOLVE THE RUBIK S CUBE: EXPERIMENTS WITH IDEAL AND APPROXIMATE PERFORMANCE FUNCTIONS

Laboratorio di Intelligenza Artificiale e Robotica

Nine Steps to Building a New Toastmasters Club

AN EXAMPLE OF THE GOMORY CUTTING PLANE ALGORITHM. max z = 3x 1 + 4x 2. 3x 1 x x x x N 2

Genevieve L. Hartman, Ph.D.

An Effective Framework for Fast Expert Mining in Collaboration Networks: A Group-Oriented and Cost-Based Method

(Sub)Gradient Descent

CSC200: Lecture 4. Allan Borodin

SHARED LEADERSHIP. Building Student Success within a Strong School Community

Active Ingredients of Instructional Coaching Results from a qualitative strand embedded in a randomized control trial

Rule Learning With Negation: Issues Regarding Effectiveness

A Study of the Effectiveness of Using PER-Based Reforms in a Summer Setting

8. UTILIZATION OF SCHOOL FACILITIES

IT Students Workshop within Strategic Partnership of Leibniz University and Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University

Machine Learning and Data Mining. Ensembles of Learners. Prof. Alexander Ihler

Cognitive Modeling. Tower of Hanoi: Description. Tower of Hanoi: The Task. Lecture 5: Models of Problem Solving. Frank Keller.

CS 101 Computer Science I Fall Instructor Muller. Syllabus

CS 1103 Computer Science I Honors. Fall Instructor Muller. Syllabus

Guidelines for the Master s Thesis Project in Biomedicine BIMM60 (30 hp): planning, writing and presentation.

Ricochet Robots - A Case Study for Human Complex Problem Solving

Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Teaching Primary Mathematics: A Case Study of Two Teachers

WSU Five-Year Program Review Self-Study Cover Page

Notes on The Sciences of the Artificial Adapted from a shorter document written for course (Deciding What to Design) 1

Corrective Feedback and Persistent Learning for Information Extraction

ABSTRACT. A major goal of human genetics is the discovery and validation of genetic polymorphisms

INTERMEDIATE ALGEBRA Course Syllabus

Name Class Date. Graphing Proportional Relationships

Urban Legends Three Week Unit 9th/10th Speech

Strategy for teaching communication skills in dentistry

A Minimalist Approach to Code-Switching. In the field of linguistics, the topic of bilingualism is a broad one. There are many

Hans-Ulrich Block, Hans Haugeneder Siemens AG, MOnchen ZT ZTI INF W. Germany. (2) [S' [NP who][s does he try to find [NP e]]s IS' $=~

Basic Parsing with Context-Free Grammars. Some slides adapted from Julia Hirschberg and Dan Jurafsky 1

Page 1 of 11. Curriculum Map: Grade 4 Math Course: Math 4 Sub-topic: General. Grade(s): None specified

Learning goal-oriented strategies in problem solving

P a g e 1. Grade 5. Grant funded by:

Math 181, Calculus I

Fundraising 101 Introduction to Autism Speaks. An Orientation for New Hires

INPE São José dos Campos

Machine Learning from Garden Path Sentences: The Application of Computational Linguistics

Analysis of Hybrid Soft and Hard Computing Techniques for Forex Monitoring Systems

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN QUEENSLAND

LEAD AGENCY MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

Ensemble Technique Utilization for Indonesian Dependency Parser

Some Principles of Automated Natural Language Information Extraction

CS Machine Learning

A Domain Ontology Development Environment Using a MRD and Text Corpus

A Version Space Approach to Learning Context-free Grammars

An Investigation into Team-Based Planning

Arizona s College and Career Ready Standards Mathematics

TEACHING AND EXAMINATION REGULATIONS PART B: programme-specific section MASTER S PROGRAMME IN LOGIC

Team Formation for Generalized Tasks in Expertise Social Networks

Stacks Teacher notes. Activity description. Suitability. Time. AMP resources. Equipment. Key mathematical language. Key processes

Exploration. CS : Deep Reinforcement Learning Sergey Levine

ENME 605 Advanced Control Systems, Fall 2015 Department of Mechanical Engineering

THE ROLE OF TOOL AND TEACHER MEDIATIONS IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF MEANINGS FOR REFLECTION

OFFICE OF HUMAN RESOURCES SAMPLE WEB CONFERENCE OR ON-CAMPUS INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

Designing e-learning materials with learning objects

Rule Learning with Negation: Issues Regarding Effectiveness

Short Text Understanding Through Lexical-Semantic Analysis

BADM 641 (sec. 7D1) (on-line) Decision Analysis August 16 October 6, 2017 CRN: 83777

CHEMISTRY 400 Senior Seminar in Chemistry Spring 2013

Given a directed graph G =(N A), where N is a set of m nodes and A. destination node, implying a direction for ow to follow. Arcs have limitations

CS 446: Machine Learning

COMPUTER-ASSISTED INDEPENDENT STUDY IN MULTIVARIATE CALCULUS

Word learning as Bayesian inference

Standards for Professional Practice

MGT/MGP/MGB 261: Investment Analysis

A Graph Based Authorship Identification Approach

PESIT SOUTH CAMPUS 10CS71-OBJECT-ORIENTED MODELING AND DESIGN. Faculty: Mrs.Sumana Sinha No. Of Hours: 52. Outcomes

Career Series Interview with Dr. Dan Costa, a National Program Director for the EPA

Reducing Abstraction When Learning Graph Theory

Longitudinal Analysis of the Effectiveness of DCPS Teachers

Thinking Maps for Organizing Thinking

Global Convention on Coaching: Together Envisaging a Future for coaching

RESEARCH INTEGRITY AND SCHOLARSHIP POLICY

Exemplar 6 th Grade Math Unit: Prime Factorization, Greatest Common Factor, and Least Common Multiple

Program Review

International Partnerships in Teacher Education: Experiences from a Comenius 2.1 Project

Augusta University MPA Program Diversity and Cultural Competency Plan. Section One: Description of the Plan

Presentation skills. Bojan Jovanoski, project assistant. University Skopje Business Start-up Centre

e-learning Coordinator

Report from the visiting committee

How to get the most out of EuroSTAR 2013

Transcription:

Jade Yu Cheng ICS 311 Homework 9 Oct 2, 2008 Question for lecture 12 Problem 15- on p. 365 Planning a company party Professor Stewart is consulting for the president of a corporation that is planning a company party. The company has a hierarchical structure; that is, the supervisor relation forms a tree rooted at the president. The personnel office has ranked each employee with a conviviality rating, which is a real number. In order to make the party fun for all attendees, the president does not want both an employee and his or her immediate supervisor to attend. Professor Stewart is given the tree that describes the structure of the corporation, using the left-child, right-sibling representation described in Section 10., as figure below. Each node of the tree holds, in addition to the pointers, the name of an employee and that employee s conviviality ranking. Describe an algorithm to make up a guest list that maximizes the sum of the conviviality ratings of the guests. Analyze the running time of your algorithm.

Answer: Consider the problem is to find the best combination of the nodes that give me the largest summation of conviviality value. The constraint is that the selected nodes don t have direct parent-child relationships with any other nodes in the selected collection. When 1, the tree structure has only root node. The problem in this case can be considered as the base case. We would always select it and the total conviviality value.. When n = 2, or n > 2 while the tree structure has a height of one. Or we can just say when the tree structure has a height of one. They are the parent node and the child node (nodes). The problem in this case is to find the larger conviviality value between the parent node and the child node (nodes). max,, or max,. When the tree structure has a height larger than one, we can divide the problem into parts. If we don t consider the sub-trees, the problem would belong to one of the two categories above. We would easily find out the selection solution for the root part of the tree. We assign it as. At the same time there exist the rest of the nodes that sum up to. Then, we consider sub-trees. There are two cases that are independent from each other. Case 1. If the selecting solution for the sub-tree that we are going to add does not conflict with the selecting solution for the root part, we simply add the subtree, and sum up the conviviality values., where the represents the best conviviality value summation of the particular child sub-tree. We can put it as an example below: 5 3 2 5 1 2

5 1 2 3 2 5 Case 2. If the selecting solution for the sub-tree that we are going to add does conflict with the selecting solution for the root part, we can t simply add the subtree, and sum up the conviviality values. Instead we need to examine the payoff of different combinations. We really have two ways to handle it. One option is the combination of, where represents the conviviality value of nodes that are not contained in the good selecting solution for the child tree. We can put it as an example below: 5 7 1 2

5 1 2 7 We put the combined solution for this particular parent tree and child tree as because 7 3 2 3 19, while 5 1 2 7 15. Therefore we sacrifice the higher term in the child sub-tree, while keeping the parent tree as it is. The other option is the combination of, where represents the conviviality value of nodes that are contained in the good selecting solution for the child tree. We can put it as an example below: 5 20 1 2

5 1 2 20 We put the combined solution for this particular parent tree and child tree as because 5 1 2 20 28, while 7 3 3 2 19. Therefore we sacrifice the higher term in the parent tree, while keeping the child sub-tree as it is. Apparently, the overall best solution contains the best solutions of sub-problems. In order to compare and choose the best solution of the tree structure as in the last figure above, I need to know the best solution of the child sub-tree. The first Hallmark of Dynamic-programming is the optimal substructure. An optimal solution to a problem (instance) contains optimal solutions to sub-problems. Also, to compute all the combinations for tree structures that have different heights, I need to repeat some of the sub-problem works. For example, in order to find the best solution of the tree structure as in the last figure above, I need to know maybe first compute the left sub-tree that contains value 1, 2, and. The when we consider the problem of how to incorporate the right child sub-tree, we already assume that the left sub-tree is a part of the parent tree. At this moment, we don t need to compute the left sub-tree more than once. Instead we would store the result of the solution of the left sub-tree somewhere. When the solution for this sub-tree is needed later on, we can just use it. This feature matches with the second Hallmark of Dynamic-programming Overlapping sub-problems. A recursive solution contains a small number of distinct sub-problems repeated many times. Therefore, the planning a company party problem is a good candidate of using dynamic programming. Based on this thought, I can implement the Memoization algorithm. I can try keeping a list to store the sub-problems that will be gradually computed and will be used more than once while computing the larger sets of inputs. If we consider the operation numbers of all the elements in the list I

would get a collection of h elements, where h is the height of the tree structure. The runtime of each element is either 1 or 2 because we need to do the comparison only two times for the most, comparing the summation of and. We don t have control of the tree structure. If it looks more like a linked list, h would be more close to the value of,. If it s the opposite, then h would be a lot smaller than n,. Therefore the worst case runtime of the problem as a whole would be.