MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2267848830 · doi:10.1287/ijoc.2015.0668

An AO<sup>*</sup> Based Exact Algorithm for the Canadian Traveler Problem

2016· article· en· W2267848830 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vural Aksakallı, Oz Sahin, İbrahim Arı

Bibliographic record

VenueINFORMS journal on computing · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Search Problems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTree traversalVertex (graph theory)Computer sciencePruningMathematical optimizationAlgorithmMarkov decision processVertex coverGraphGraph traversalTime complexityMarkov processTheoretical computer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian traveler problem (CTP) is a simple, yet challenging, stochastic optimization problem wherein an agent is given a graph where some edges are blocked with certain probabilities and the status of these edges can be disambiguated dynamically upon reaching an incident vertex. The goal is to devise a traversal policy that results in the shortest expected walk length between a given starting vertex and a termination vertex. CTP has been shown to be intractable in many broad settings. In this paper, we introduce an optimal algorithm for the problem based on a Markov decision process formulation, which is a new improvement on AO * search that takes advantage of the special problem structure in CTP. We call our algorithm CAO * , which stands for AO * with caching. CAO * uses a caching mechanism to avoid re-expansion of previously visited states and makes use of admissible upper bounds at a node level for dynamic state-space pruning. CAO * is not polynomial time, but it can dramatically shorten the execution time needed to find an exact solution for moderately sized instances. We present computational experiments on a realistic variant of the problem involving an actual maritime minefield data set.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.166
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations18
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINFORMS journal on computingSame topicOptimization and Search ProblemsFrench-language works237,207