MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161298439 · doi:10.1177/0278364914547786

Sampling-based A* algorithm for robot path-planning

2014· article· en· W2161298439 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Robotics Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMotion planningProbabilistic roadmapComputer scienceMathematical optimizationProbabilistic logicAlgorithmSimulated annealingGraphEntropy (arrow of time)Cross entropyHeuristicAdaptive simulated annealingRobotArtificial intelligenceMathematicsTheoretical computer sciencePrinciple of maximum entropy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a generalization of the classic A* algorithm to the domain of sampling-based motion planning. The root assumptions of the A* algorithm are examined and reformulated in a manner that enables a direct use of the search strategy as the driving force behind the generation of new samples in a motion graph. Formal analysis is presented to show probabilistic completeness and convergence of the method. This leads to a highly exploitative method which does not sacrifice entropy. Many improvements are presented to this versatile method, most notably, an optimal connection strategy, a bias towards the goal region via an Anytime A* heuristic, and balancing of exploration and exploitation on a simulated annealing schedule. Empirical results are presented to assess the proposed method both qualitatively and quantitatively in the context of high-dimensional planning problems. The potential of the proposed methods is apparent, both in terms of reliability and quality of solutions found.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.213
Threshold uncertainty score0.865

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0050.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.423
Teacher spread0.281 · 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