MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998030398 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v34i05.6219

Generalized and Sub-Optimal Bipartite Constraints for Conflict-Based Search

2020· article· en· W2998030398 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaLockheed MartinNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBipartite graphConstraint (computer-aided design)Mathematical optimizationComputer scienceReduction (mathematics)GraphPathfindingSearch algorithmState (computer science)Theoretical computer scienceAlgorithmMathematicsShortest path problem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main idea of conflict-based search (CBS), a popular, state-of-the-art algorithm for multi-agent pathfinding is to resolve conflicts between agents by systematically adding constraints to agents. Recently, CBS has been adapted for new domains and variants, including non-unit costs and continuous time settings. These adaptations require new types of constraints. This paper introduces a new automatic constraint generation technique called bipartite reduction (BR). BR converts the constraint generation step of CBS to a surrogate bipartite graph problem. The properties of BR guarantee completeness and optimality for CBS. Also, BR's properties may be relaxed to obtain suboptimal solutions. Empirical results show that BR yields significant speedups in 2k connected grids over the previous state-of-the-art for both optimal and suboptimal search.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.732
Threshold uncertainty score0.759

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.159
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.163 · 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