I dont know what the rules, expectations, and limitations are in the academic / research world, so I need to correct that now.
I reached out to dozens of researchers asking them to review a one page summary document of an improved, generalized pathfinding algorithm I created. I did not offer anything in return because of the information I grew up with. Until today. I assume that in the post-critical mass internet (and the perhaps the ongoing administration apocalypse), their time has become a very valuable resource.
Anyways, a small handful of them agreed to take a look, but no one has responded. It's not a simple solution so I take it its not worth their _free_ time to poke into it.
I'm not sure what I should be offering in return for their time. Should I pay them? Offer them co-authorship if they want to work on it with me (for free?)?
I dont have an academic background so I need help putting together a white paper and probably need someone established to vouch for me to get it published, if successful. Plus I need someone experienced to poke holes in the algorithm.
I know the algorithm[1] has potential because it's functioning in the video game I was working on before I diverted my resources into the graph theory.
[1] I created an improved general solution to any pathfinding algorithm that searches for more than one path, e.g. All Pairs, k-Shortest Simple; for any type of graph (directed, undirected, +weighted, possibly +/- weighted). The All Pairs is functioning in my game, and I have a working paper solution to the k-Shortest Simple Paths problem.
(1) Publish a pre-print of the algorithm. Use https://vixra.org/ , not arxiv. Take care to write it well; see other papers for examples; try it out on your friends.
(2) Submit to a conference in the area; be sure to cite your preprint when doing so. If you get rejected, read their comments and improve it.
The only researchers who might be interested in your work are those whose work is very closely related to yours. The only way you will identify them is to read academic papers in that specific field. The fact the your algorithm works in a game has very little impact. It will need to be compared to what is widely recognized and accepted in academic circles.
You're correct, academics are very time poor. They are subjected to many pressures to produce and thus will not expend any effort poking into some one page summary of an algorithm. If you present them with a solid draft for a paper and it is in their area of work, then you might get more interest.
The structure of an academic/research paper, needs to state the problem, survey the field, identify the key contributions in the field, detail your improvement and then provide verifiable comparisons. That is, prove that for a specific area of application your algorithm has specific advantages. The preparation of papers tends to require 3-6 months to first submission. It's not unusual to encounter several rejections before a journal or conference accepts a paper.