MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124464337 · doi:10.1613/jair.2497

Dynamic Control in Real-Time Heuristic Search

2008· article· en· W2124464337 on OpenAlexafffund
Vadim Bulitko, Mitja Luštrek, Jonathan Schaeffer, Yngvi Björnsson, Sverrir Sigmundarson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Artificial Intelligence Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Games
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHáskólinn í ReykjavíkMinistrstvo za visoko šolstvo, znanost in tehnologijo
KeywordsComputer scienceIncremental heuristic searchHeuristicCompleteness (order theory)Bounded functionAction (physics)Constant (computer programming)Search problemMathematical optimizationTime complexityState (computer science)Search algorithmBeam searchAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Real-time heuristic search is a challenging type of agent-centered search because the agent's planning time per action is bounded by a constant independent of problem size. A common problem that imposes such restrictions is pathfinding in modern computer games where a large number of units must plan their paths simultaneously over large maps. Common search algorithms (e.g., A*, IDA*, D*, ARA*, AD*) are inherently not real-time and may lose completeness when a constant bound is imposed on per-action planning time. Real-time search algorithms retain completeness but frequently produce unacceptably suboptimal solutions. In this paper, we extend classic and modern real-time search algorithms with an automated mechanism for dynamic depth and subgoal selection. The new algorithms remain real-time and complete. On large computer game maps, they find paths within 7% of optimal while on average expanding roughly a single state per action. This is nearly a three-fold improvement in suboptimality over the existing state-of-the-art algorithms and, at the same time, a 15-fold improvement in the amount of planning per action.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.142
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations43
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Artificial Intelligence ResearchSame topicArtificial Intelligence in GamesFrench-language works237,207