MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156078757 · doi:10.1109/cig.2007.368082

Adversarial Planning Through Strategy Simulation

2007· article· en· W2156078757 on OpenAlexafffund
Frantisek Sailer, Michael Buro, Marc Lanctot

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Games
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceAdversarial systemSoftware deploymentNash equilibriumVideo gameQuality (philosophy)Automated planning and schedulingGame theoryArtificial intelligenceOperations researchSoftware engineeringMultimediaMathematical optimizationEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adversarial planning in highly complex decision domains, such as modern video games, has not yet received much attention from AI researchers. In this paper, we present a planning framework that uses strategy simulation in conjunction with Nash-equilibrium strategy approximation. We apply this framework to an army deployment problem in a real-time strategy game setting and present experimental results that indicate a performance gain over the scripted strategies that the system is built on. This technique provides an automated way of increasing the decision quality of scripted AI systems and is therefore ideally suited for video games and combat simulators

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations66
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArtificial Intelligence in GamesFrench-language works237,207