Consider the following question:
$n$ vehicles occupy squares $(1, 1)$ through $(n, 1)$ (i.e., the bottom row) of an $n \times n$ grid. The vehicles must be moved to the top row but in reverse order; so the vehicle $i$ that starts in $(i, 1)$ must end up in $(n − i + 1, n)$. On each time step, every one of the $n$ vehicles can move one square up, down, left, or right, or stay put; but if a vehicle stays put, one other adjacent vehicle (but not more than one) can hop over it. Two vehicles cannot occupy the same square.
Suppose that each heuristic function $h_i$ is both admissible and consistent. Now what I want to know is to check the admissibility and consistency of the following heuristics:
$h= \Sigma_i h_i$
$h= \min_i (h_i)$
$h= \max_i (h_i)$
$h = \frac{\Sigma_i h_i}{n}$
P.S: As a lemma, we know that consistency implies the admissibility of the heuristic function.
Problem Explanation
From this link, I have found that the first heuristic is neither admissible, nor consistent.
I know that the second and the fourth heuristics are either consistent, or admissible.
I have faced with one contradiction in the third heuristic:
Here we see that if car 3 hops twice, the total cost of moving all the cars to their destinations is 3, whereas the heuristic $\max(h_1, \dots, h_n) = 4$.
Problem
So, $\max(h_1, ..., h_n)$ must be consistent and admissible, but the above example shows that it's not. What is my mistake?