Multi-Agent Reach-Avoid Games: Two Attackers Versus One Defender and Mixed Integer Programming
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose a hybrid approach that combines Hamilton-Jacobi (HJ) reachability and mixed-integer optimization for solving a reach-avoid game with multiple attackers and defenders. The reach-avoid game is an important problem with potential applications in air traffic control and multi-agent motion planning; however, solving this game for many attackers and defenders is intractable due to the adversarial nature of the agents and the high problem dimensionality. In this paper, we first propose an HJ reachability-based method for solving the reach-avoid game in which 2 attackers are playing against 1 defender; we derive the numerically convergent optimal winning sets for the two sides in environments with obstacles. Utilizing this result and previous results for the 1 vs. 1 game, we further propose solving the general multi-agent reach-avoid game by determining the defender assignments that can maximize the number of attackers captured via a Mixed Integer Program (MIP). Our method generalizes previous state-of-the-art results and is especially useful when there are fewer defenders than attackers. We validate our theoretical results in numerical simulations.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it