An Efficient Rule-Based Constructive Heuristic to Solve Dynamic Weapon-Target Assignment Problem
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we propose an efficient rule-based heuristic to solve asset-based dynamic weapon-target assignment (DWTA) problems. The main idea of the proposed heuristic is to utilize the domain knowledge of DWTA problems to directly achieve weapon assignment, without large number of function evaluations. We update the saturation states of constraints in the assignment process to guarantee the feasibility of generated solutions. For the purpose of testing the performance of the proposed heuristic, we build a general Monte Carlo simulation-based DWTA framework. For comparison, we also employ a Monte Carlo method (MCM) to make DWTA decisions in different defense scenarios. From simulations with DWTA instances under different scales, the heuristic has obvious advantages over the MCM with regard to solution quality and computation time. The proposed method can solve large-scale DWTA problems (e.g., those including 100 weapons, 100 targets, and four defense stages) within only a few seconds.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it