Watchmen: Scalable Cheat-Resistant Support for Distributed Multi-player Online 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
Multi-player online games are inherently distributed applications, and a wide range of distributed architectures have been proposed. However, only few successful commercial systems follow such approaches, even given their benefits, due to one main hurdle: the easiness with which cheaters can disrupt the game state computation and dissemination, perform illegal actions, or unduly gain access to sensitive information. The challenge is that any measures used to address cheating must meet the heavy scalability and tight latency requirements of fast paced games. We propose Watchmen, the first distributed scalable protocol designed with cheat detection and prevention in mind that supports fast paced games. It is based on a randomized dynamic proxy scheme for both the dissemination and verification of actions. Furthermore, Watchmen reduces the information exposed to players close to the minimum required to render the game. We build our proof-of-concept prototype on top of Quake III. We show that Watchmen, while scaling to hundreds of players and meeting the tight latency requirements of first person shooter games, is able to significantly reduce opportunities to cheat, even in the presence of collusion.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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