MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multi-Goal Multi-Agent Pickup and Delivery

2022· article· en· W4312858026 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.

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScalabilityComputer scienceTask (project management)PickupPath (computing)Distributed computingArtificial intelligenceComputer networkDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we consider the Multi-Agent Pickup-and-Delivery (MAPD) problem, where agents constantly engage with new tasks and need to plan collision-free paths to execute them. To execute a task, an agent needs to visit a pair of goal locations, consisting of a pickup location and a delivery location. We propose two variants of an algorithm that assigns a sequence of tasks to each agent using the anytime algorithm Large Neighborhood Search (LNS) and plans paths using the Multi-Agent Path Finding (MAPF) algorithm Priority-Based Search (PBS). LNS-PBS is complete for well-formed MAPD instances, a realistic subclass of MAPD instances, and empirically more effective than the existing complete MAPD algorithm CENTRAL. LNS-wPBS provides no completeness guarantee but is empirically more efficient and stable than LNS-PBS. It scales to thousands of agents and thousands of tasks in a large warehouse and is empirically more effective than the existing scalable MAPD algorithm HBH+MLA*. LNS-PBS and LNS-wPBS also apply to a more general variant of MAPD, namely the Multi-Goal MAPD (MG-MAPD) problem, where tasks can have different numbers of goal locations.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.207 · 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