MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3002166437 · doi:10.1080/01605682.2019.1685362

Near-optimal search-and-rescue path planning for a moving target

2020· article· en· W3002166437 on OpenAlexaff
Jean Berger, Mohamed Barkaoui, Nassirou Lo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Operational Research Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical optimizationComputer scienceMotion planningHeuristicInteger programmingPath (computing)Computational complexity theoryMathematicsAlgorithmArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Discrete search and rescue path planning for a moving target problem is computationally hard. Despite heuristic methods proposed so far, for which efficiency is further plagued by random episodic target kinematic behavior, qualifying real solution goodness and specifying optimality gap still remain elusive. In this paper a new alternate formulation is proposed to solve the search path planning problem for a moving target. Rather than tackling explicitly the original problem model, a remarkable property is exploited to solve a conjugate mixed-integer linear programming problem. The approach lies on a compact open-loop search path planning problem model with anticipated feedback to efficiently minimize probability of detection failure as opposed to traditionally maximize cumulative probability of success. Preserving path solution optimality, solving the conjugate problem proves very valuable in significantly reducing computational complexity. This is mainly achievable by virtue of the resulting problem objective property which concisely defines the function to be minimized in terms of terminal belief contributions only. For the first time optimal or upper bound solution computation are made possible in reasonable time for practical size problems. A network representation is further utilized to simplify modeling and facilitate constraint specification. Computational results show the strength of the approach for one and two searching agent problem instances.

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 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)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.705

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Operational Research SocietySame topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207