A Multi-Objective Optimization Problem on Evacuating 2 Robots from the Disk in the Face-to-Face Model; Trade-Offs between Worst-Case and Average-Case Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The problem of evacuating two robots from the disk in the face-to-face model was first introduced by Czyzowicz et al. [DISC’2014], and has been extensively studied (along with many variations) ever since with respect to worst-case analysis. We initiate the study of the same problem with respect to average-case analysis, which is also equivalent to designing randomized algorithms for the problem. In particular, we introduce constrained optimization problem 2Evac𝐹2𝐹, in which one is trying to minimize the average-case cost of the evacuation algorithm given that the worst-case cost does not exceed w. The problem is of special interest with respect to practical applications, since a common objective in search-and-rescue operations is to minimize the average completion time, given that a certain worst-case threshold is not exceeded, e.g., for safety or limited energy reasons. Our main contribution is the design and analysis of families of new evacuation parameterized algorithms which can solve 2Evac𝐹2𝐹, for every w for which the problem is feasible. Notably, the worst-case analysis of the problem, since its introduction, has been relying on technical numerical, computer-assisted calculations, following tedious robot trajectory analysis. Part of our contribution is a novel systematic procedure, which given any evacuation algorithm, can derive its worst- and average-case performance in a clean and unified way.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".