Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the rendezvous problem for two robots moving in the plane (or on a line). Robots are autonomous, anonymous, oblivious, and carry colored lights that are visible to both. We consider deterministic distributed algorithms in which robots do not use distance information, but try to reduce (or increase) their distance by a constant factor, depending on their lights' colors. We give a complete characterization of the number of colors that are necessary to solve the rendezvous problem in every possible model, ranging from fully synchronous to semi-synchronous to asynchronous, rigid and non-rigid, with preset or arbitrary initial configuration. In particular, we show that three colors are sufficient in the non-rigid asynchronous model with arbitrary initial configuration. In contrast, two colors are insufficient in the rigid asynchronous model with arbitrary initial configuration and in the non-rigid asynchronous model with preset initial configuration. Additionally, if the robots are able to distinguish between zero and non-zero distances, we show how they can solve rendezvous and detect termination using only three colors, even in the non-rigid asynchronous model with arbitrary initial configuration.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".