• This forum is specifically for the discussion of factual science and technology. When the topic moves to speculation, then it needs to also move to the parent forum, Science Fiction and Fantasy (SF/F).

    If the topic of a discussion becomes political, even remotely so, then it immediately does no longer belong here. Failure to comply with these simple and reasonable guidelines will result in one of the following.
    1. the thread will be moved to the appropriate forum
    2. the thread will be closed to further posts.
    3. the thread will remain, but the posts that deviate from the topic will be relocated or deleted.
    Thank you for understanding.​

Algorithms: "Traveling salesperson" problem solution gets (very) slightly better

Introversion

Pie aren't squared, pie are round!
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 17, 2013
Messages
10,771
Reaction score
15,242
Location
Massachusetts
https://www.quantamagazine.org/computer-scientists-break-traveling-salesperson-record-20201008/

Quanta Magazine said:
When Nathan Klein started graduate school two years ago, his advisers proposed a modest plan: to work together on one of the most famous, long-standing problems in theoretical computer science.

Even if they didn’t manage to solve it, they figured, Klein would learn a lot in the process. He went along with the idea. “I didn’t know to be intimidated,” he said. “I was just a first-year grad student — I don’t know what’s going on.”

Now, in a paper posted online in July, Klein and his advisers at the University of Washington, Anna Karlin and Shayan Oveis Gharan, have finally achieved a goal computer scientists have pursued for nearly half a century: a better way to find approximate solutions to the traveling salesperson problem.

This optimization problem, which seeks the shortest (or least expensive) round trip through a collection of cities, has applications ranging from DNA sequencing to ride-sharing logistics. Over the decades, it has inspired many of the most fundamental advances in computer science, helping to illuminate the power of techniques such as linear programming. But researchers have yet to fully explore its possibilities — and not for want of trying.

The traveling salesperson problem “isn’t a problem, it’s an addiction,” as Christos Papadimitriou, a leading expert in computational complexity, is fond of saying.

Most computer scientists believe that there is no algorithm that can efficiently find the best solutions for all possible combinations of cities. But in 1976, Nicos Christofides came up with an algorithm that efficiently finds approximate solutions — round trips that are at most 50% longer than the best round trip. At the time, computer scientists expected that someone would soon improve on Christofides’ simple algorithm and come closer to the true solution. But the anticipated progress did not arrive.

“A lot of people spent countless hours trying to improve this result,” said Amin Saberi of Stanford University.

Now Karlin, Klein and Oveis Gharan have proved that an algorithm devised a decade ago beats Christofides’ 50% factor, though they were only able to subtract 0.2 billionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a percent. Yet this minuscule improvement breaks through both a theoretical logjam and a psychological one. Researchers hope that it will open the floodgates to further improvements.

...
 
Last edited:

MaeZe

Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 6, 2016
Messages
12,833
Reaction score
6,593
Location
Ralph's side of the island.
So I get there's a math problem or proof here, but I can't help thinking isn't this something a human can look at and answer? Forgive my lay stupidity because I truly am interested: what made this unsolvable by an eyes-on human?

If it's just the algorithm or math problem, then you can just say that's what it is and I'll understand, really I will.
 

ChaseJxyz

Writes 🏳️‍⚧️🌕🐺 and 🏳️‍⚧️🌕🐺 accessories
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Messages
4,524
Reaction score
6,203
Location
The Rottenest City on the Pacific Coast
Website
www.chasej.xyz
I think it's an issue of scale. If it's 3 places (start at home, the pharmacy, the store, the library, return home) then the number of possible options is pretty low (especially if you're just doing errands around town). But if it's at scale, like there's a bunch of different flights or ways you can drive between cities, then the number of options is just Very Big. Human brains are really good at picking out patterns (as are birds and some other animals) because we've had, what, half a billion years to get it right? Another way to think about AI/algorithims is "Is this a problem that can be solved with very complex math?" Such as can you do very complex math to write a deep, meaningful poem that's totally original? Perhaps, but it would take a huge set of information to learn what a "good" poem is and a lot of math to determine what combinations of things make the "best" poem. But to write an article about the stock market (this went up today, that went down) is way easier.


I'm very jaded when it comes to algorithms now, considering the biases they harbor, whether by the programmers writing it or the data fed into it. I had a coworker at a tech company who had very dark skin. He used to work at HP (as did a lot of people here, before Carly Fiorina came through) and he got randomly pulled into a meeting to "prove" that their webcams can, indeed, sense black people. But it didn't sense him, they said oh that's just a fluke, this isn't an issue. Guess what happened! And this is because the algorithms were only given lighter-skinned faces to look at to determine what a human face looks like. Where do rideshare companies get their data to determine where people like to go and at what times? People in poorer neighborhoods probably aren't getting rideshares to/from their place there, they might not have phones that are good enough to be constantly tracking their GPS to determine patterns of movement. Richer people are probably not going to those areas for many reasons. There's no data anyone ever goes there, better not have available cars nearby!
 

Chris P

Likes metaphors mixed, not stirred
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 4, 2009
Messages
22,669
Reaction score
7,356
Location
Wash., D.C. area
So I get there's a math problem or proof here, but I can't help thinking isn't this something a human can look at and answer? Forgive my lay stupidity because I truly am interested: what made this unsolvable by an eyes-on human?

If it's just the algorithm or math problem, then you can just say that's what it is and I'll understand, really I will.

Ask two locals the best way to get to a town 30 miles away, then watch them fight over whether staying on Highway 61 through Muddville is better than getting on the Route 66 bypass because traffic can be so stupid crazy in the afternoon, or if the construction through Area 51 is still going on. If you hit the lights wrong AND the school is letting out, you could be stuck for 20 minutes and you'd be better off taking the longer route through Lake Woebegone.

This silly example (if I understand the article right) illustrates the issue: variability in even a small number of nearly equivalent solutions add up to a noticable difference particularly for complex computational processes requiring millions of individual decisions. If you can find an efficient way to mimic the decision making process in a way that confidently produces a correct result, you can shave a few microseconds off of each calculation. The calculations for Han and Chewie's jump to light speed would take significantly less time, and be completed with higher confidence they don't shoot right through a star cluster and end their little joy ride real quick.
 
Last edited: