Pathfinding algorithm comparison: Dijkstra's vs. A* (A-Star)

So cool

du coup si je comprend bien Dijkstra's est plus longs mais donne un chemin plus précis alors que A* est extrêmement rapide mais ne donnera pas le chemin le plus court.

could you give out tutorial?

superb animation i got an idea for a new video game

Tutorial de como usar blender please!

why does it flash bang me when it finds the path?

Great visu ! Do you have a Git where we can follow your work ?

Wonderful!! Just wow ✨✨✨

Hello, Please can someone tell me how to do this, is there any github repo on this project, please let me know if anyone has resources on this ?

Code please ???

Hi YT sent me here for some reason. Can someone far more intelligent than me explain how this is different to what something like Google Maps does? Or is it the same principle?

would be cool to see how you made the visualisations

Does A* have to flashbang us?

That poorly-implemented A* reminds me of that ancient Intel joke:
me: what's 27/14
pentium: 3
me: that's wrong
pentium: maybe, but fast!

Looking at the video description, you can implement A* with greedy-best-first search since those are two different algorithms. So this is more of a Djikstra va Greedy-best-first search.

Dijkstra: The evil empire is hunting for you.

A*: The evil empire is hunting for you - and they have spies everywhere.

WHY DID YOU FLASHBANG MEEEEEEEEEE

Dijkstra is like doing work meticulously. A* is like doing "ehh, whatever, close enough."

is it faster to climb straight over a mountain or go around it?
the length of the path may be longer, but the amount of time it takes to traverse is shorter
i submit that the a* implementation found the shortest temporal route
the expressways and bypasses it picked should be faster timewise due to their higher speed limits and lower number of traffic lights

So it comes down to: "Are you more in a rush of finding a path or to actually go there?"

what? you are unable to at least read some english text and tell us what tf is that a* algorithm?

This is not the fastest route on either one, this is a simulation of a path of least resistance (A*) and the other is a simulation of first discovery (Dijkstra)

both can connect the dots, neither are exactly accurate.

A* is unable to represent the speed of an object since Evey line has its own speed. Every intersection is a dilemma, and the less decisions it has to make the faster it moves.

Dijkstra is unable to connect obvious paths if the map appears broken until a path that connects the two is discovered. It then automatically assumes that this is the fastest path (first discovery) as seen in the last example. Even if there is a more efficient path.

Para saber realmente cual es mejor seria probandolo en la vida real los dos tipos de sistemas, teniendo en cuenta el trafico y las distintas velocidades de las vias ya que muchas veces el mas corto no es el mas rapido

finnally I found it, thanks <3

A* is so much faster that it can afford to find a number of more paths so it can then evaluate the shortest of those.. and still likely finish processing faster than Dijkstra.. so it would be faster and very likely to provide the shortest route every time..

Is it possible for Dijkstras algorithm to log all the paths to all the nodes it searched on the journey to its Destination? Then you store these for later retrieval?

Fun fact. A* breaks apart when you have more then 1 target.
Because it turns into O(X) while the other one stays at O(1) no matter how many targets are left.

Either that A* is not properly implemented or they're using a Potato as heuristic.

Singapore research !

A* is optimized dijkstra. If yout set the weight of the cost funtion to zero in A*, you basically only the path information(Dijkstra).

Fix the title this is not A* it's just A

Of course it starts in Rome. All roads lead to Rome.

Turns out one cannot simply use the Manhattan distance in Manhattan.

A* is not implemented correctly. Why bother looking for a first arbitrary path solution, we want the shortest.

Is it possible to merge the intentions of both algorithms to find a partially efficient path while also ensuring there’s a lesser time for the algorithm to calculate?

Those algos might seem similar to unexperienced programmers, but they are diffirent things and serve diffirent purposes.

A* is a pathfinding algorithm and Djkstra is a mapping algorithm. Therefore it processes much more data than A* given the same dataset.

For example, in a game, use djkstra to map information on the game envirnoment for AI, and use A* for player controlled entities.

I think you used a bad heuristic for A* . I was yelling “Manhattan Distance” at my screen, i bet that would work really well in NY example. Edit: Remembering A*, the heuristic works best if it (almost) always better than the real path. So euclidian distance at 60mph should work. Curious what you used?

What was the heuristic function used in this implementation?

I just got flashbanged a few times

Why don't the source and target actually line up with the map

Cool, but A* and Dijkstra should return the same shortest path

A* is fast, but it’s weakness is obvious: moving backwards as part of the solution

Beautifully animated

This is wild but the location you chose on the new york map is my house

Dijkstra's algorithm looks like how a slime mold navigates toward food.

your description says you used “greedy best first logic” - that is not A* which is why you don’t get the optimal solution

Can you make a tutorial of how make this?, this is incredible

Imagine an AI enhanced A* algorithm that has been trained on billions of these examples.