12 ms·
Is this faster than A*? I think that the problem with A* is that it use a mix of horizontal and vertical and 45° lines, but your proposal makes more natural st
by gus_massa 2y ago
Is this faster than A*?
I think that the problem with A* is that it use a mix of horizontal and vertical and 45° lines, but your proposal makes more natural straigh lines. I think it's more nice, but don't think it's more efficient (but I don't have a hard proof).
PS: The guidelines ask to use the original title. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- Farer 2y agoSince I recently felt the limitations of the A* algorithm in my LIVE project, I am planning to proceed with this attempt. As a result of discussing with many AIs, it was difficult to find existing cases. As far as I have reviewed extensively, I have come to the conclusion that the A* algorithm also involves a lot of unnecessary computations, so I am trying to minimize such computations themselves. Since I am continuously running the service in LIVE, I believe I will be able to thoroughly verify its performance. For reference, the current LIVE service is utilizing a Mini PC equipped with an N100 CPU. This is also an attempt to achieve performance based on minimal specifications.
- dietr1ch 2y agoA* searches on a generic weighted graph, there's no vertical, horizontal nor diagonal movements. The only thing that matters is which nodes exists and how they are connected. If diagonals on a 2D-grid are forbidden, then you need to use the Manhattan distance as the heuristic.