MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388448692 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3508435/v1

Cooperative control for multi-player pursuit-evasion games embedded on communication technology with reinforcement learning

2023· preprint· en· W4388448692 on OpenAlexaff
Balasubramanian Prabhu Kavin, K Aravinda, Praveena Rachel Kamala, E. Naresh, Piyush Kumar Pareek

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGuidance and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsHorizon College and Seminary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcement learningCurse of dimensionalityComputer scienceGame theoryHomogeneousPursuerPursuit-evasionField (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceMathematical optimizationOperations researchComputer securityEngineeringMathematical economicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recent advances in research on the Multi-agent System (MAS) optimal control issue will help sectors like robotics, communications, and power systems. This work looks at the intelligent design of a large-scale multi-pursuer and multi-evader pursuit-evasion game. Based on reinforcement learning, a distributed cooperative pursuit method with communication is created. The famed Curse of Dimensionality poses a serious danger to multi-player pursuit-evasion game designs due to the sheer number of agents, especially in hostile areas where there aren't many communication options available to encourage player information exchange. In order to find the best pursuit-evasion strategies using a novel type of probability density function (PDF) rather than exhaustive data from all the remaining teams or agents, the Mean Field Games (MFG) theory has been used. A novel MAS optimum type oversight system with a decentralised and computer-friendly decision method is urgently needed. Mean field game theory is used to create the Actor-critic-mass (ACM), a decentralised optimal control system, to address the aforementioned issues. Additionally, the homogeneous decentralised Actor-critic-mass (HDACM) which improves the ACM method, does away with restrictions like homogeneous agents and cost functions. Finally, two applications make use of the PAS algorithm.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicGuidance and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207