MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7066124444

Heuristics for the Canadian traveler problem with neutralizations

2021· article· en· W7066124444 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Plasma Interactions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeuristicsA priori and a posterioriEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionContext (archaeology)Path (computing)Motion planningGraphRobot
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canadian Traveler Problem with Neutralizations (CTPN) is a recently introduced challenging graph-theoretic path-planning problem. In CTPN, traversability status of some edges in the underlying graph is dependent on an a priori probability distribution. A traveling agent has two capabilities called disambiguation and neutralization. In the disambiguation case, the true status of an ambiguous edge (traversable or untraversable) is revealed when the agent is at either end of such edges. If the neutralization capability is exploited, the edge immediately becomes traversable. These capabilities are limited and may add a cost of increased path length. The goal of the agent is to find the shortest expected path length by devising an optimal policy that dictates when and where to disambiguate or neutralize. CTPN has important and practical applications within the context of expert and intelligent systems. These include autonomous robot navigation, adaptive transportation systems, naval and land minefield countermeasures, and navigation inside disaster areas for emergency relief operations. There is a recently proposed state-of-the-art exact algorithm that solves CTPN to optimality, called CAON∗ (AO∗ with Caching and Neutralizations). CAON∗ is based on an extension of the well-known AO∗ (AND-OR search) algorithm. Even though CAON∗ has significant improvements compared to its predecessors, it still has exponential run time and space complexity and it has been shown to solve only small instances of CTPN in practice. In this study, we introduce new heuristics for CTPN based on novel strategies that can be used to solve much larger and realistic problem instances. We provide computational experiments on Delaunay graphs to assess and compare the performance of these heuristics and CAON∗, in terms of both run time and solution quality. Our computational experiments indicate that the proposed heuristics run extremely fast (well under a second in all cases) and they result in up to

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.783
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicLaser-Plasma Interactions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207