Skip to main content

A Comparison of Tree Search Methods for Graph Topology Design Problems

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Design Computing and Cognition '18 (DCC 2018)

Abstract

In this paper, we discuss the relevance and effectiveness of two common methods for searching decision trees that represent design problems. When design problems are encoded in decision trees they are often multimodal, capture a range of complexity in valid solutions, and have distinguishable internal locations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Rozenberg G, Ehrig H (1997) Handbook of graph grammars and computing by graph transformation

    Google Scholar 

  2. Kanal LN, Kumar V (1988) Search in artificial intelligence. Springer-Verlag

    Google Scholar 

  3. Koza JR (1992) Genetic programming: on the programming of computers by means of natural selection. The MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  4. Browne C, Powley E (2012) A survey of monte carlo tree search methods. IEEE Trans Intell AI Games 4(1):1–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Perez D et al (2014) Solving the physical traveling salesman problem: tree search and macro actions. IEEE Trans Comput Intell AI Games 6(1):31–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Perez D, Rohlfshagen P, Lucas SM (2012) Monte Carlo tree search: long-term versus short-term planning. In: 2012 IEEE conference on computational intelligence and games (CIG), pp 219–226

    Google Scholar 

  7. Manion CA, Arlitt R, Tumer IY, Campbell MI, Greaney PA (2015) Towards automated design of mechanically functional molecules. In: Volume 2A: 41st design automation conference, p V02AT03A004

    Google Scholar 

  8. Koning H, Eizenberg J (1981) The language of the prairie: Frank Lloyd Wright’s prairie houses. Environ Plan B Plan Des 8(3):295–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Patel J, Campbell MI (2008) An approach to automate concept generation of sheet metal parts based on manufacturing operations. In: Volume 1: 34th design automation conference, parts A and B, vol DETC2008-4, pp 133–142

    Google Scholar 

  10. Patel J, Campbell MI (2008) Topological and parametric tune and prune synthesis of sheet metal parts compared to genetic algorithm. In: AIAA/ISSMO multidisciplinary analysis and optimization conference

    Google Scholar 

  11. Swantner A, Campbell MI (2012) Topological and parametric optimization of gear trains. Eng Optim vol in review:1–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Radhakrishnan P, Campbell MI (2010) A graph grammar based scheme for generating and evaluating planar mechanisms. In: Design computing and cognition ‘10, pp 663–679

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Patterson WRJ, Campbell MI (2011) PipeSynth: an algorithm for automated topological and parametric design and optimization of pipe networks. ASME Conf Proc 2011(54822):13–23

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hooshmand A, Campbell MI (2016) Truss layout design and optimization using a generative synthesis approach. Comput Struct 163:1–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Shea K, Fest E, Smith IFC (2002) Developing intelligent tensegrity structures with stochastic search. Adv Eng Inform 16(1):21–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Shankar P, Ju J, Summers JD, Ziegert JC (2010) DETC2010—design of sinusoidal auxetic structures for high shear. Eng Conf 1–10

    Google Scholar 

  17. Whitley D (1994) A genetic algorithm tutorial. Stat Comput 4(2):65–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. MATLAB—The Language of Technical Computing. 09 Dec 2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.mathworks.com/products/matlab/. Accessed 09 Dec 2015

  19. Browne CB et al (2012) A survey of monte carlo tree search methods. IEEE Trans Comput Intell AI Games 4(1):1–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Graph with directed edges—MATLAB

    Google Scholar 

  21. Intel® Xeon® Processor E3-1240 v2 (8 M Cache, 3.40 GHz) Product Specifications. Intel® ARK (Product Specs). [Online]. Available: https://ark.intel.com/products/65730/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E3-1240-v2-8M-Cache-3_40-GHz. Accessed 16 Dec 2017

Download references

Acknowledgements

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under grant CMMI-1662731. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations presented in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthew I. Campbell .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Short, AR., DuPont, B.L., Campbell, M.I. (2019). A Comparison of Tree Search Methods for Graph Topology Design Problems. In: Gero, J. (eds) Design Computing and Cognition '18. DCC 2018. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05363-5_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05363-5_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-05362-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-05363-5

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics