MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1565135348 · doi:10.1109/syscon.2015.7116828

Game network traffic simulation by a custom bot

2015· article· en· W1565135348 on OpenAlexaff
Trevor Alstad, J. Riley Dunkin, Simon Detlor, Brad French, Heath Caswell, Zane Ouimet, Youry Khmelevsky, Gaétan Hains

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsOkanagan College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer networkHuman–computer interactionSimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Minecraft is a popular video game played worldwide, and is built simply enough to be used for network analysis and research. This paper describes an automated software agent created to simulate player traffic within the game. Realistic network traffic simulation was the goal that inspired the creation of our “Minecraft bot”: an automatic program or bot that could act in similar ways to a real player, and be able to be mass produced to saturate a local area network. This will facilitate network research by allowing users to have a more scalable testing environment and thus enable controlled laboratory experiments that are impossible to set up in live online gaming environments. The basic commands in Minecraft consist of moving, placing and breaking blocks (pieces of environment) and a realistic bot needs to replicate these actions. Another important objective was to have the ability to create hundreds or thousands of bots doing the same actions, to be able to create artificial latency on the network. This paper will go through the entire lifecycle of our project, starting with some information on existing research about the subject, and how it relates to ours. Following that we describe our bot requirements, the work that was done to find a pre-built solution, the solution we ended up using and how it was modified to fit our requirements. We then have a section showing performance experiments we ran, which compared the packet count and traffic volume between players and bots, as well as cpu usage statistics as more connections were made to the server to ensure that our server hardware was not a factor in our network testing. The final section is the conclusion which talks about the outcome of our project in relation to our original goals, and how it will impact future research in this area.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207