MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136139408 · doi:10.1109/iscc.2005.107

New Algorithms for Maintaining All-Pairs Shortest Paths

2005· article· en· W2136139408 on OpenAlexaff
Sudip Misra, B. John Oommen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Parking Systems Research
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsK shortest path routingShortest path problemShortest Path Faster AlgorithmConstrained Shortest Path FirstYen's algorithmComputer scienceAlgorithmAverage path lengthPrivate Network-to-Network InterfaceFloyd–Warshall algorithmLink (geometry)Path (computing)Mathematical optimizationRouting (electronic design automation)Dijkstra's algorithmMathematicsLink-state routing protocolTheoretical computer scienceRouting protocolGraph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a new solution to the dynamic all-pairs shortest path routing problem, using a linear reinforcement learning scheme. It involves finding the shortest path in a stochastic network, where there are continuous probabilistically-based updates in link-costs. In this paper we present the details of the algorithm and also provide an example to illustrate how the algorithm would function. The initial experimental results of the algorithm show that the algorithm is few orders of magnitude superior to the algorithms available in the literature. It can be used to find the shortest path (between all pairs of nodes in a network) within the "statistical" average network, which converges irrespective of whether there are new changes in link-costs or not. On the other hand, the existing algorithms fails to exhibit such a behavior and would recalculate the affected shortest paths after each link-cost update.

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)0.007
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.261 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSmart Parking Systems ResearchFrench-language works237,207