Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Agents and Artificial Intelligence 2019
DOI: 10.5220/0007470002260231
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Combining Strengths of Optimal Multi-Agent Path Finding Algorithms

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

1
2
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
2
2

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
1
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…1a). These results comply with the observation made for the classical MAPF problem that the CBS-based algorithm performs well on sparse instances, and reduction-based algorithms perform well on smaller, more dense instances ( Švancara and Barták 2019). Surprisingly, SAT-grouped is not always better than SATbasic, especially on the largest maps.…”
Section: Empirical Evaluationsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…1a). These results comply with the observation made for the classical MAPF problem that the CBS-based algorithm performs well on sparse instances, and reduction-based algorithms perform well on smaller, more dense instances ( Švancara and Barták 2019). Surprisingly, SAT-grouped is not always better than SATbasic, especially on the largest maps.…”
Section: Empirical Evaluationsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…Our G2V model performs well despite only having access to nodes on shortest paths, potentially a very small fraction of the total number of nodes in the instance. In the shortest paths, there is no explicit information on map type, obstacle density, or map size, heuristics which have previously been used to select algorithms [5,20]. Despite this lack of map information, our G2V model performs quite well, better than any single algorithm in our portfolio and close in performance to our CNN-based models, which have access to much more information.…”
Section: G2vmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…It has been shown that if a MAPF instance can be decomposed into multiple disjoint sub-problems, solving each sub-problem independently and combining their results can be significantly faster than solving the original problem with a MAPF algorithm [20]. Each sub-problem may have different map and agent characteristics, which will affect the runtime of whatever MAPF algorithm is chosen for each sub-problem.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%