Unbounded Sub-Optimal Conflict-Based Search in Complex Domains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conflict-Based Search (CBS) is a state of the art algorithm for multi-agent pathfinding (MAPF). CBS has been studied in many domains, however, most research has focused on classic domains with point agents that move with unit time steps and unit costs. In this work, we are interested in MAPF solutions for classic domains and complex domains, that is, domains which include shaped agents, actions with non-unit costs, non-uniform action durations and/or non-holonomic or kinodynamic movement constraints. Prior work on sub-optimal formulations of CBS has focused on heuristics. Instead, our work introduces new types of constraints. We show that certain constraint formulations have properties that can cause CBS to run orders of magnitude faster, but may cause the algorithm to be incomplete and yield sub-optimal results. We introduce new conditional constraints which allow CBS to exploit constraint properties which cause it to run faster and still retain algorithmic completeness. We additionally formulate a new constraint accumulation technique called constraint overloading which utilizes conditional constraints in order to achieve further performance gains.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".