Problem Difficulty and the Phase Transition in Heuristic Search
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the recent years, there has been significant work on the difficulty of heuristic search problems, identifying different problem instance characteristics that can have a significant impact on search effort. Phase transitions in the solubility of random problem instances have proved useful in the study of problem difficulty for other classes of computational problems, notably SAT and CSP, and it has been shown that the hardest problems typically occur during this rapid transition. In this work, we perform the first empirical investigation of the phase transition phenomena for heuristic search. We establish the existence of a rapid transition in the solubility of an abstract model of heuristic search problems and show that, for greedy best first search, the hardest instances are associated with the phase transition region. We then perform a novel investigation of the behavior of heuristics of different strength across the solubility spectrum. Finally, we demonstrate that the behavior of our abstract model carries over to commonly used benchmark problems including the Pancake Problem, Grid Navigation, TopSpin, and the Towers of Hanoi. An interesting deviation is observed and explained in the Sliding Puzzle.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.079 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".