MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Interaction-Minimizing Roadmap Optimization for High-Density Multi-Agent Path Finding

2025· article· en· W4414432324 on OpenAlexaff
Sören Weindel, Jan Wilch, Christoph Kögel, Keli Xiao, Birgit Vogel‐Heuser

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsFord Motor Company (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkflowController (irrigation)Path (computing)Position (finance)SMT placement equipmentWork (physics)Control (management)Key (lock)Automation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern industry increasingly demands customizability from each element of their workflow and factories. A prominent example for this is the advent of Automated Guided Vehicles (AGV) in intralogistics tasks, which autonomously navigate the manufacturing floor, reacting dynamically to variations in the workflow. One such application makes use of magnetically propelled planar drive systems to transport products between manufacturing stations, replacing traditional solutions which are limited in their ability to efficiently adapt to new requirements.This work presents an AGV control approach capable of offloading large parts of the computational expense into an offline preprocessing step: A unidirectional roadmap is generated using alternating position optimization and network modification operations, with the goal of reducing the number of interactions between agents to be resolved at runtime. This concept was successfully validated in simulation. An accompanying tech report and implementation further details the presented approach, as well as the used controller and simulator.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.512

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207