MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417123665 · doi:10.1016/j.jcss.2025.103737

The power of knowledge in linear search for an escaping target

2025· article· en· W4417123665 on OpenAlexafffund
Jared Coleman, Dmitry Ivanov, Evangelos Kranakis, Danny Kriz̧anc, Oscar Morales-Ponce

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computer and System Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDiffusion and Search Dynamics
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPower (physics)Key (lock)Linear programmingSearch algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider linear search for an escaping target whose speed and/or initial distance from the origin may be unknown to the searcher. The searcher (an autonomous mobile agent) is initially placed at the origin of the real line and can move with maximum speed 1 in either direction along the line. The oblivious mobile target that is moving away from the origin with a constant speed v < 1 is initially placed by an adversary on the infinite line at distance d from the origin in an unknown direction. We consider four cases, depending on whether v and/or d is known to the searcher. The main contributions of this paper are new lower bounds as well as algorithms leading to new upper bounds for search in these settings. We present tight bounds for the cases when v is known. For the cases where v is unknown, we prove an optimal (up to lower order terms in the exponent) competitive ratio in the case where d is known and improved upper and lower bounds for the case where d is unknown. These results solve an open problem proposed in Coleman et al. (2022) [11] .

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.017
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computer and System SciencesSame topicDiffusion and Search DynamicsFrench-language works237,207