Learning in n-pursuer n-evader differential games
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper discusses learning in n-purser n-evader games. In a pursuit-evasion game, one player (the pursuer) pursues another one while the other (the evader) tries to escape. We assume that each player only knows the instantaneous position of the other players but at the same time none of them knows its control strategy nor the control strategy of the other players. Therefore, the players have to self-learn their control strategies on-line by interaction with each other. In this paper, we extend our previous work from learning in a single pursuit-evasion game to learning in a multi-pursuit-evasion game. We use the Q(λ)-learning based genetic fuzzy controller technique (QLBGFC) proposed in. The proposed technique combines reinforcement learning with both a fuzzy controller and genetic algorithms in a two-phase structure. In addition to the proposed QLBGFC, we construct a new Q-table that is responsible for learning the coupling process between the pursuers and the evaders. To test the performance of the proposed technique, it is compared with the optimal strategy of a single pursuit-evasion game. Computer simulations show the usefulness of the proposed technique.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".