MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132432849 · doi:10.1145/1517494.1517505

Persistence in massively multiplayer online games

2008· article· en· W2132432849 on OpenAlexaff
Kaiwen Zhang, Bettina Kemme, Alexandre Denault

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPeer-to-Peer Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersistence (discontinuity)Computer scienceMassively parallelMultimediaHuman–computer interactionParallel computingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The most important asset of a Massively Multiplayer Online Game is its world state, as it represents the combined efforts and progress of all its participants. Thus, it is extremely important that this state is not lost in case of server failures. Survival of the world state is typically achieved by making it persistent, e.g., by storing it in a relational database. The main challenge of this approach is to track the large volume of modifications applied to the world in real time. This paper compares a variety of strategies to persist changes of the game world. While critical events must be written synchronously to the persistent storage, a set of approximation strategies are discussed and compared that are suitable for events with low consistency requirements, such as player movements. An analysis to better understand the possible limitations and bottlenecks of these strategies is presented using experimental data from an MMOG research framework. Our analysis shows that a distance-based solution offers the scalability and efficiency required for large-scale games as well as offering error bounds and eliminating unnecessary updates associated with localized movement.

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)0.015
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.193 · 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
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

Citations26
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPeer-to-Peer Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207