MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Analysis of the Applications of Algorithm and Automatic Pathfinding

2024· article· en· W4404727836 on OpenAlexaff
Weikun He

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied and Computational Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPathfindingComputer scienceAlgorithmComputer graphics (images)Artificial intelligenceTheoretical computer scienceShortest path problemGraph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current development of autonomous driving technology is very hot, which involves two fundamental aspects: one is the operating system as the foundation, and the other is the algorithm application. The theme of this review is to study the related algorithmic technologies and combine them with one of the key functions of autonomous driving: autonomous routing. The review discusses the application direction and environment of this function, and involves the use of algorithms in the backend. Autonomous routing is a key concept in multiple technical fields and plays an important role in helping entities effectively navigate complex environments. This review centers on the concept of autonomous routing and focuses on its application direction, usage environment, and supporting algorithms. The core research question is autonomous routing and its working principle. The review analyzes the main application scenarios of autonomous routing, such as autonomous driving and game development, and explores the algorithms commonly used in these scenarios. By conducting a comprehensive analysis of the main usage environments and algorithm structures, the review provides insights into the current state of autonomous routing technology. The research findings show that autonomous routing technology has been deeply embedded in multiple industries and is continuously expanding as the demand for technology grows. Furthermore, the review explores the potential future development of autonomous routing, anticipating that it will further develop in responding to various new challenges and opportunities.

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)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied and Computational EngineeringSame topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207