Bike-assisted evacuation of robots on a line with asymmetric S/R communication
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two autonomous mobile robots and a non-autonomous one, also called bike, are placed at the origin of an infinite line. The autonomous robots can travel with maximum speed 1. When a robot rides the bike its speed increases to v > 1 . Exactly one robot at a time can ride the bike, moreover the bike is non-autonomous in that it cannot move on its own. An Exit is placed on the line at a location which is unknown to the robots and at distance d from the origin. The robots have limited communication behavior; one robot is a sender (denoted by S) in that it can send information wirelessly at any distance and receive messages only in F2F (Face-to-Face), while the other robot is a receiver (denoted by R) in that it can receive information wirelessly but can send information only F2F. The bike has no communication capabilities of its own. We refer to the resulting communication model of the ensemble of the two autonomous robots and the bike as S/R. Our general goal is to understand the impact of the non-autonomous robot in assisting the evacuation of two communication-limited autonomous robots. Our main contribution is to provide a new evacuation algorithm that enables both robots to evacuate from the unknown Exit in the S/R model. We also analyze the resulting evacuation time as a function of the bike's speed v and give upper and lower bounds on the competitive ratio of the resulting algorithm for the entire range of possible values of v .
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".