Deep Learning for Real-Time Heuristic Search Algorithm Selection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Real-time heuristic search algorithms are used for creating agents that rely on local information and move in a bounded amount of time making them an excellent candidate for video games as planning time can be controlled. Path finding on video game maps has become the de facto standard for evaluating real-time heuristic search algorithms. Over the years researchers have worked to identify areas where these algorithms perform poorly in an attempt to mitigate their weaknesses. Recent work illustrates the benefits of tailoring algorithms for a given problem as performance is heavily dependent on the search space. In order to determine which algorithm to select for solving the search problems on a map the developer would have to run all the algorithms in consideration to obtain the correct choice. Our work extends the previous algorithm selection approach to use a deep learning classifier to select the algorithm to use on new maps without having to evaluate the algorithms on the map. To do so we select a portfolio of algorithms and train a classifier to predict which portfolio member to use on a unseen new map. Our empirical results show that selecting algorithms dynamically can outperform the single best algorithm from the portfolio on new maps, as well provide the lower bound for potential improvements to motivate further work on this approach.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".