MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080500069 · doi:10.4018/jgcms.2013040101

Gamification, Serious Games, Ludic Simulation, and other Contentious Categories

2013· article· en· W2080500069 on OpenAlexaff
Brock Dubbels

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Gaming and Computer-Mediated Simulations · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational Games and Gamification
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbandonment (legal)NarrativeEntertainmentComputer scienceProductivityWork (physics)Conceptual frameworkSoftwareFeature (linguistics)Game designHuman–computer interactionSociologyEngineeringSocial sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper provides a conceptual framework for gamification, ludic simulations, and serious games. Central to this framework is the spectrum of design that differentiates work and play. Work and play help define software in purpose as games, productivity software, and entertainment. These categories are informed through cognitive feature analysis of narrative and game play structure. Both can be analyzed to determine the degree of work or play in an activity, as well as issues that influence sustained engagement, which is essential for avoiding game abandonment. To demonstrate the framework for the design and analysis of gamification, ludic simulations, and serious games, several case studies are presented with feature analysis to substantiate the categories.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.015
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.320
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations22
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Gaming and Computer-Mediated SimulationsSame topicEducational Games and GamificationFrench-language works237,207