MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067199245 · doi:10.5555/2820144.2820150

Building a game engine: a tale of modern model-driven engineering

2015· article· en· W2067199245 on OpenAlexaff
Victor Guana, Eleni Stroulia, Vina Nguyen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicModel-Driven Software Engineering Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGame DeveloperReuseComputer scienceGame designGame testingGame programmingGame engineAsset (computer security)Software engineeringSet (abstract data type)Video game developmentGame mechanicsGame design documentEngineeringMultimediaComputer securityProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Game engines enable developers to reuse assets from previously developed games, thus easing the software-engineering challenges around the video-game development experience and making the implementation of games less expensive, less technologically brittle, and more efficient. However, the construction of game engines is challenging in itself, it involves the specification of well defined architectures and typical game play behaviors, flexible enough to enable game designers to implement their vision, while, at the same time, simplifying the implementation through asset and code reuse. In this paper we present a set of lessons learned through the design and construction PhyDSL-2, a game engine for 2D physics-based games. Our experience involves the active use of modern model-driven engineering technologies, to overcome the complexity of the engine design and to systematize its maintenance and evolution.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.008
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations15
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicModel-Driven Software Engineering TechniquesFrench-language works237,207