Game-map Pathfinding with Per-Problem Selection of Synthesized Heuristics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Variants of A* search are widely used for video-game pathfinding with a heuristic function that is typically either a generic formula designed by humans (e.g., the Manhattan distance) or pre-computed for a specific video-game map. Recent work attempted to combine portability of the former and higher performance of the latter by automatically synthesizing arithmetic formulae. Such formulae are simple enough to be human-readable, portable enough to provide guidance on novel maps and yet complex enough to notably outperform a baseline. Each formula-represented heuristic was synthesized for a given map, presumably capturing some features of the map. However, maps can be non-uniform and some regions of one map may have features similar to another map. This work uses a portfolio of synthesized heuristics and selects from it on a per-problem basis. The selection is done automatically by determining the pair of map regions in which the start and the goal states of a given problem instance belong. A pre-computed database gives the highest-performing heuristic from the portfolio for that pair of regions. This heuristic is then used to guide A* to solve the problem instance. Empirical evaluation on maps from video games indicates noticeable speed-up compared to using a single synthesized heuristic for all problem instances on a map.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".