IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/oropre/v63y2015i2p353-362.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technical Note—Trading Off Quick versus Slow Actions in Optimal Search

Author

Listed:
  • Steven M. Shechter

    (Sauder School of Business, University of British Columbia, Vancouver BC V6T 1Z2, Canada)

  • Farhad Ghassemi

    (Amazon.com, Inc., Seattle, WA 98108)

  • Yasin Gocgun

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Istanbul Kemerburgaz University, 34217 Istanbul, Turkey)

  • Martin L. Puterman

    (Sauder School of Business, University of British Columbia, Vancouver BC V6T 1Z2, Canada)

Abstract

We consider the search for a target whose precise location is uncertain. The search region is divided into grid cells, and the searcher decides which cell to visit next and whether to search it quickly or slowly. A quick search of a cell containing the target may damage it, resulting in a failed search, or it may locate the target safely. If the target is not in the cell, the search continues over the remaining cells. If a slow search is performed on a cell, then the search ends in failure with a fixed probability regardless of whether or not the target is in that cell (e.g., because of enemy fire while performing the slow search). If the slow search survives this failure possibility, then the search ends in success if the target is in that cell; otherwise, the search continues over the remaining cells. We seek to minimize the probability of the search ending in failure and consider two types of rules for visiting cells: the unconstrained search, in which the searcher may visit cells in any order, and the constrained search, in which the searcher may only visit adjacent cells (e.g., up, down, left, or right of cells already visited). We prove that the optimal policy for the unconstrained search is to search quickly some initial set of cells with the lowest probabilities of containing the target before slowly searching the remaining cells in decreasing order of probabilities. For the special case in which a quick search on a cell containing the target damages it with certainty, the optimal policy is to search all cells slowly, in decreasing order of probabilities. We use the optimal solution of the unconstrained search in a branch-and-bound optimal solution algorithm for the constrained search. For larger instances, we evaluate heuristics and approximate dynamic programming approaches for finding good solutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Steven M. Shechter & Farhad Ghassemi & Yasin Gocgun & Martin L. Puterman, 2015. "Technical Note—Trading Off Quick versus Slow Actions in Optimal Search," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 63(2), pages 353-362, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:oropre:v:63:y:2015:i:2:p:353-362
    DOI: 10.1287/opre.2015.1349
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/opre.2015.1349
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/opre.2015.1349?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Steve Alpern & Thomas Lidbetter, 2013. "Mining Coal or Finding Terrorists: The Expanding Search Paradigm," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(2), pages 265-279, April.
    2. James N. Eagle & James R. Yee, 1990. "An Optimal Branch-and-Bound Procedure for the Constrained Path, Moving Target Search Problem," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 38(1), pages 110-114, February.
    3. S. Gal & J. V. Howard, 2005. "Rendezvous-Evasion Search in Two Boxes," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 53(4), pages 689-697, August.
    4. Sheldon M. Ross, 1969. "A Problem in Optimal Search and Stop," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(6), pages 984-992, December.
    5. Hiroyuki Sato & Johannes O. Royset, 2010. "Path optimization for the resource‐constrained searcher," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 57(5), pages 422-440, August.
    6. James M. Dobbie, 1968. "A Survey of Search Theory," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 16(3), pages 525-537, June.
    7. Steve Alpern & Shmuel Gal, 2002. "Searching for an Agent Who May OR May Not Want to be Found," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 311-323, April.
    8. Moshe Kress & Kyle Lin & Roberto Szechtman, 2008. "Optimal discrete search with imperfect specificity," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 68(3), pages 539-549, December.
    9. K. E. Trummel & J. R. Weisinger, 1986. "Technical Note—The Complexity of the Optimal Searcher Path Problem," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 324-327, April.
    10. Ingo Wegener, 1980. "The Discrete Sequential Search Problem with Nonrandom Cost and Overlook Probabilities," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 373-380, August.
    11. Stanley J. Benkoski & Michael G. Monticino & James R. Weisinger, 1991. "A survey of the search theory literature," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(4), pages 469-494, August.
    12. Udo Lössner & Ingo Wegener, 1982. "Discrete Sequential Search with Positive Switch Cost," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 7(3), pages 426-440, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Steve Alpern & Thomas Lidbetter, 2019. "Approximate solutions for expanding search games on general networks," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 275(2), pages 259-279, April.
    2. Baston, Vic & Kikuta, Kensaku, 2019. "A search problem on a bipartite network," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(1), pages 227-237.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. T. C. E. Cheng & B. Kriheli & E. Levner & C. T. Ng, 2021. "Scheduling an autonomous robot searching for hidden targets," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 298(1), pages 95-109, March.
    2. Johannes O. Royset & Hiroyuki Sato, 2010. "Route optimization for multiple searchers," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 57(8), pages 701-717, December.
    3. Jesse Pietz & Johannes O. Royset, 2013. "Generalized orienteering problem with resource dependent rewards," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 60(4), pages 294-312, June.
    4. Jake Clarkson & Kevin D. Glazebrook & Kyle Y. Lin, 2020. "Fast or Slow: Search in Discrete Locations with Two Search Modes," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 68(2), pages 552-571, March.
    5. Morin, Michael & Abi-Zeid, Irène & Quimper, Claude-Guy, 2023. "Ant colony optimization for path planning in search and rescue operations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 305(1), pages 53-63.
    6. Ben Hermans & Roel Leus & Jannik Matuschke, 2022. "Exact and Approximation Algorithms for the Expanding Search Problem," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 34(1), pages 281-296, January.
    7. Dinah Rosenberg & Eilon Solan & Nicolas Vieille, 2009. "Protocols with No Acknowledgment," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 57(4), pages 905-915, August.
    8. Baycik, N. Orkun & Sharkey, Thomas C. & Rainwater, Chase E., 2020. "A Markov Decision Process approach for balancing intelligence and interdiction operations in city-level drug trafficking enforcement," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    9. Joseph B. Kadane, 2015. "Optimal discrete search with technological choice," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 81(3), pages 317-336, June.
    10. Bourque, François-Alex, 2019. "Solving the moving target search problem using indistinguishable searchers," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(1), pages 45-52.
    11. Stanley J. Benkoski & Michael G. Monticino & James R. Weisinger, 1991. "A survey of the search theory literature," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(4), pages 469-494, August.
    12. J F J Vermeulen & M van den Brink, 2005. "The search for an alerted moving target," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 56(5), pages 514-525, May.
    13. Delavernhe, Florian & Jaillet, Patrick & Rossi, André & Sevaux, Marc, 2021. "Planning a multi-sensors search for a moving target considering traveling costs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(2), pages 469-482.
    14. Baston, Vic & Kikuta, Kensaku, 2019. "A search problem on a bipartite network," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(1), pages 227-237.
    15. Lau, Haye & Huang, Shoudong & Dissanayake, Gamini, 2008. "Discounted MEAN bound for the optimal searcher path problem with non-uniform travel times," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 190(2), pages 383-397, October.
    16. Michael Zabarankin & Stan Uryasev & Robert Murphey, 2006. "Aircraft routing under the risk of detection," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(8), pages 728-747, December.
    17. Robbert Fokkink & Ken Kikuta & David Ramsey, 2017. "The search value of a set," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 256(1), pages 63-73, September.
    18. Lawrence D. Stone & Alan R. Washburn, 1991. "Introduction special issue on search theory," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(4), pages 465-468, August.
    19. Angelopoulos, Spyros & Lidbetter, Thomas, 2020. "Competitive search in a network," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 286(2), pages 781-790.
    20. Vassili Kolokoltsov, 2017. "The Evolutionary Game of Pressure (or Interference), Resistance and Collaboration," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 42(4), pages 915-944, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:oropre:v:63:y:2015:i:2:p:353-362. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.