Talk:D*: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 00:27, 21 September 2020

Computing Start‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Robotics Start‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Robotics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Robotics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RoboticsWikipedia:WikiProject RoboticsTemplate:WikiProject RoboticsRobotics articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cleanup

I've added a cleanup tag to this article. It's very poorly written on a variety of different levels. 24.87.6.107 (talk) 18:52, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I cleaned up the introduction of the article and added lots of information. I left the description of Focussed D* alone. This should be worked on as well (best by the original author) but I am not the right person to do that. So, I left the clean-up tag intact. Antonbharkamsan (talk) 18:39, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Focused" and "Focussed"

~~"Focused" is the preferred spelling, so I've used that throughout the article.~~ Stentz used "Focussed" in his paper, so I'm leaving the title verbatim. StevenBell (talk) 01:38, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit - The article consistently used "Focussed D*" prior to a mistaken edit, so I'll leave it that way. StevenBell (talk) 01:47, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lifelong planning A*

Who is Amita? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.230.144.220 (talk) 11:29, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pseudocode

The pseudo code includes nearly 10 methods that are not defined, eg. setNextPointAndUpdateCost. Without pseudo-code for all these, or at least an API definition, it is not adding value. I have also never seen D* expressed so simply, compared with the original Stentz paper. which makes me suspicious. The included code has no references, and I've searched for other pseudo-code descriptions and found none, so this is novel and uncited information. The world needs crisp pseudo-code for D* but this isn't it.Peter.corke (talk) 00:27, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 == Lifelong planning A*  ==
 Who is Amita?  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/85.230.144.220|85.230.144.220]] ([[User talk:85.230.144.220|talk]]) 11:29, 18 April 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
+== Pseudocode ==
+The pseudo code includes nearly 10 methods that are not defined, eg. setNextPointAndUpdateCost.  Without pseudo-code for all these, or at least an API definition, it is not adding value.  I have also never seen D* expressed so simply, compared with the original Stentz paper. which makes me suspicious. The included code has no references, and I've searched for other pseudo-code descriptions and found none, so this is novel and uncited information.  The world needs crisp pseudo-code for D* but this isn't it.[[User:Peter.corke|Peter.corke]] ([[User talk:Peter.corke|talk]]) 00:27, 21 September 2020 (UTC)