4/8/16 channel dvr (19 pages) Security System Samsung SDH-P5080 Specifications. 4/8/16 channel dvr (146 pages) DVR Samsung SDH-C75080 Quick Network Setup Manual. Optical Transport Network (OTN) technology represents both a technical leap forward in optical networking over SONET/SDH and a business opportunity for carriers and. With the global demand for connectivity consistently increasing, the demand for a modernized infrastructure and a flexible architecture that can carry legacy traffic has also grown.After nearly 25 years since the introduction of SONET/SDH, the evolution of these standards has ceased, and the majority of SONET/SDH equipment is reaching its planned end of life. The fact that it's beating A* is likely due to the overhead associated with A* not being worth the savings in spaces explored.Rest in peace SONET/SDH. So overall, I'm not surprised to hear that your DFS was the fastest maze-solving algorithm mostly due to DFS's simplicity and good cache locality compared with the other algorithms. So perhaps the difference between A* and DFS has to do with the maze shape in addition to their own implementation details. It may be the case that DFS tends to do better in some of those cases than others, while A* may do better or worse as well. Mazes made with DFS tend to have fewer, longer corridors, while Kruskal's algorithm and Prim's algorithm tend to make many shorter corridors. There are many different maze generation algorithms - you can use Kruskal's algorithm, DFS, Prim's algorithm, or Wilson's algorithm, for example, to generate mazes. There's one other issue and that's how the maze itself was generated. But you'd have to look at the balance between those factors to be sure. If the maze was constructed in a way that has a lot of long, twisty passageways, then A* would probably do better because it would avoid going the wrong direction until it absolutely had to, where DFS might spend lots of effort descending the wrong way. It would probably depend on the shape of the maze. DFS is generally speaking a much faster algorithm than A* because of the associated overhead of maintaining distances in A*, but A* tends to search in directions that are much more likely to get you to the destination. Given the choice between the two, my bet is that DFS would be slightly faster, since generally speaking the constant factor for DFS is lower than BFS. DFS stops as soon as it finds the exit, and it's likely to explore lots of dead ends along the way, so there's similarly a good chance that it'll explore a large fraction of the maze cells. In that sense, if there were no obstacles, you'd expect BFS to visit some constant fraction of the total spaces in the maze before finding the exit, and with obstacles present it's likely to explore most, if not all, of the spaces. The radius of this circle will be equal to the length of the shortest path found. In that sense, you can imagine that the regions searched by BFS will form something that vaguely approximates a circle centered on the start location. BFS expands outward from the starting location by exploring paths of progressively longer and longer lengths. Let's make a quick geometric argument here. The advantage of BFS is that it will stop searching as soon as it finds the shortest path, with the drawback being that memory accesses are more scattered and play less well with caches. The advantage of DFS is that it's theoretically fast (linear time) and the memory access patterns involved in running DFS (maintaining the top of a stack and probing places near the most-recently-visited spot) plays well with caches. In that sense, we can probably rule out Dijkstra's as a candidate for the fastest algorithm here. Taking any step will cost you the same amount, and the cost of maintaining a priority queue or some other structure to find the lowest-cost node in the frontier will likely cost more than a standard queue. Dijkstra's algorithm, in particular, should perform no better than BFS in this case. In that sense, running BFS, Dijkstra's, and A* will all, in some sense, incur a cost overhead because you're paying for something you aren't using. Of the four algorithms you've mentioned - BFS, DFS, Dijkstra's and A* - three of them (BFS, Dijkstra's, and A*) are designed to find shortest paths in structures where there are multiple different paths available and you're interested in finding the shortest. Let's explore it to see why you might be seeing what you're seeing.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |