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
Cooperative Pathfinding is a multi-agent path planning problem where agents must find non-colliding routes to separate destinations, given full information about the routes of other agents. This paper presents three new algorithms for efficiently solving this problem, suitable for use in Real-Time Strategy games and other real-time environments. The algorithms are decoupled approaches that break down the problem into a series of single-agent searches. Cooperative A* (CA*) searches space-time for a non-colliding route. Hierarchical Cooperative A* (HCA*) uses an abstract heuristic to boost performance. Finally, Windowed Hierarchical Cooperative A* (WHCA*) limits the space-time search depth to a dynamic window, spreading computation over the duration of the route. The algorithms are applied to a series of challenging, maze-like environments, and compared to A* with Local Repair (the current video-games industry standard). The results show that the new algorithms, especially WHCA*, are robust and efficient solutions to the Cooperative Pathfinding problem, finding more successful routes and following better paths than Local Repair A*
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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