Simultaneous Dual Level Creation for Games
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent research has shown that it is possible to design fitness functions, based on dynamic programming, that allow evolutionary computation to automatically generate level maps for games. In this study levels with multiple types of barriers are automatically designed. The levels are designed under the assumption that there are two agent types and that at least one agent type may ignore one type of barrier. A specification of multiple types of barriers thus creates two mazes, one for each agent type, that coexist in the same space. The design of these dual mazes is accomplished using different fitness functions for two mazes simultaneously. For example, this permits a level with a single long winding path for an agent that cannot walk through one type of barrier coexisting with a low-diameter maze with more complex connectivity for an agent that cannot cross another type of barrier. This study explores two representations for game levels with multiple barrier types using four different pairs of fitness functions. The system is shown to be able to design dual mazes whose properties depend substantially on both the choice of fitness function and representation used.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it