On Parallel External-Memory Bidirectional Search
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parallelization and External Memory (PEM) techniques have significantly enhanced the capabilities of search algorithms when solving large-scale problems. Previous research on PEM has primarily centered on unidirectional algorithms, with only one publication on bidirectional PEM that focuses on the meet-in-the-middle (MM) algorithm. Building upon this foundation, this paper presents a framework that integrates both uni- and bi-directional best-first search algorithms into this framework. We then develop a PEM variant of the state-of-the-art bidirectional heuristic search (BiHS) algorithm BAE* (PEM-BAE*). As previous work on BiHS did not focus on scaling problem sizes, this work enables us to evaluate bidirectional algorithms on hard problems. Empirical evaluation shows that PEM-BAE* outperforms the PEM variants of A* and the MM algorithm, as well as a parallel variant of IDA*. These findings mark a significant milestone, revealing that bidirectional search algorithms clearly outperform unidirectional search algorithms across several domains, even when equipped with state-of-the-art heuristics.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
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".