MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2573050985 · doi:10.1609/socs.v7i1.18385

A Multi-Phase Search Approach to the LEGO Construction Problem

2021· article· en· W2573050985 on OpenAlexaff
Ben Stephenson

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Symposium on Combinatorial Search · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeuristicsComponent (thermodynamics)Computer scienceConstruct (python library)Search problemTask (project management)Search algorithmConnected componentBrickSelection (genetic algorithm)Beam searchLocal search (optimization)Phase (matter)Mathematical optimizationAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The task of determining which LEGO bricks to use to construct a volume is known as the LEGO Construction Problem. This is a challenging problem because even small volumes can be constructed in a tremendously large number of ways. As a result, an exhaustive search is impractical, and more nuanced search strategies must be employed to find a good, though not necessarily optimal, solution. This paper describes a multi-phase search approach to the LEGO Construction Problem. Our first search phase uses heuristics to identify a moderate number of candidates for each layer in the model. This is followed by two different search strategies which identify alternative brick arrangements that reduce the number of connected components, undesirable edges, and bricks in the model. A final highly localized search is applied to bricks at the boundaries between the model's connected components if the previous search processes fail to reduce the model to a single connected component. Applying this four-phase search strategy to a diverse selection of models has demonstrated that it normally finds a result that consists of a single connected component when such a solution exists, and that the models are structurally sound when built.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.643
Threshold uncertainty score0.441

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the International Symposium on Combinatorial SearchSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207