Improving Local Search for Resource-Constrained Planning
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A ubiquitous feature of planning problems — problems involving the automatic generation of action sequences for attaining a given goal — is the need to economize limited resources such as fuel or money. While heuristic search, mostly based on standard algorithms such as A*, is currently the superior method for most varieties of planning, its ability to solve critically resource-constrained problems is limited: current planning heuristics are bad at dealing with this kind of structure. To address this, one can try to devise better heuristics. An alternative approach is to change the nature of the search instead. Local search has received some attention in planning, but not with a specific focus on how to deal with limited resources. We herein begin to fill this gap. We highlight the limitations of previous methods, and we devise a new improvement (smart restarts) to the local search method of a previously proposed planner (Arvand). Systematic experiments show how performance depends on problem structure and search parameters. In particular, we show that our new method can outperform previous planners by a large margin.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it