MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385763925 · doi:10.24963/ijcai.2023/625

Front-to-End Bidirectional Heuristic Search with Consistent Heuristics: Enumerating and Evaluating Algorithms and Bounds

2023· article· en· W4385763925 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMetaheuristic Optimization Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsHeuristicsHeuristicComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)AlgorithmBidirectional searchMathematical optimizationSearch algorithmBeam searchTheoretical computer scienceIncremental heuristic searchMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent research on bidirectional heuristic search (BiHS) is based on the must-expand pairs theory (MEP theory), which describes which pairs of nodes must be expanded during the search to guarantee the optimality of solutions. A separate line of research in BiHS has proposed algorithms that use lower bounds that are derived from consistent heuristics during search. This paper links these two directions, providing a comprehensive unifying view and showing that both existing and novel algorithms can be derived from the MEP theory. An extended set of bounds is formulated, encompassing both previously discovered bounds and new ones. Finally, the bounds are empirically evaluated by their contribution to the efficiency of the 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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.875

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.281 · 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