Search on a Line by Byzantine Robots
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider the problem of fault-tolerant parallel search on an infinite line by [Formula: see text] robots. Starting from the origin, the robots are required to find a target at an unknown location. The robots can move with maximum speed [Formula: see text] and can communicate wirelessly among themselves. However, among the [Formula: see text] robots, there are [Formula: see text] robots that exhibit byzantine faults. A faulty robot can fail to report the target even after reaching it, or it can make malicious claims about having found the target when in fact it has not. Given the presence of such faulty robots, the search for the target can only be concluded when the non-faulty robots have sufficient evidence that the target has been found. We aim to design algorithms that minimize the value of [Formula: see text], the time to find a target at a (unknown) distance [Formula: see text] from the origin by [Formula: see text] robots among which [Formula: see text] are faulty. We give several different algorithms whose running time depends on the ratio [Formula: see text], the density of faulty robots, and also prove lower bounds. Our algorithms are optimal for some densities of faulty robots.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".