MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2966291835 · doi:10.1609/icaps.v29i1.3474

A Multi-Label A* Algorithm for Multi-Agent Pathfinding

2019· article· en· W2966291835 on OpenAlexaff
Florian Grenouilleau, Willem‐Jan van Hoeve, John Hooker

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPathfindingComputer scienceComputationPickupSet (abstract data type)HeuristicSequence (biology)Mathematical optimizationPath (computing)Job shop schedulingAlgorithmTheoretical computer scienceArtificial intelligenceShortest path problemMathematicsScheduleGraph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given a set of agents, the multi-agent pathfinding problem consists in determining, for each agent, a path from its start location to its assigned goal while avoiding collisions with other agents. Recent work has studied variants of the problem in which agents are assigned a sequence of goals (tasks) that become available over time, such as the online multi-agent pickup and delivery (MAPD) problem. In this paper, we propose a multi-label A* algorithm (MLA*) for this problem. It extends the classic A* algorithm by allowing the computation of paths with multiple ordered goals (such as a pickup and delivery). Moreover, we develop a new h-value-based centralized heuristic for the MAPD. Computational experiments show that our proposed MLA* obtains substantial improvements in terms of makespan and service time as compared to existing methods, while being more computationally efficient. On instances with a thousand tasks and hundreds of agents, our method reduces the average service time by 43% compared to the state of the art, with considerably less computational effort.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.090
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations69
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the International Conference on Automated Planning and SchedulingSame topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207