MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2172361943 · doi:10.1155/2015/839721

Development of a Car Racing Simulator Game Using Artificial Intelligence Techniques

2015· article· en· W2172361943 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Computer Games Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational Games and Gamification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersFaculty of Graduate Studies and Research, University of ReginaUniversity of Regina
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceVideo gameVideo game developmentApplications of artificial intelligenceHuman–computer interactionVideo game designGame mechanicsSimulationGame designMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a car racing simulator game called Racer , in which the human player races a car against three game-controlled cars in a three-dimensional environment. The objective of the game is not to defeat the human player, but to provide the player with a challenging and enjoyable experience. To ensure that this objective can be accomplished, the game incorporates artificial intelligence (AI) techniques, which enable the cars to be controlled in a manner that mimics natural driving. The paper provides a brief history of AI techniques in games, presents the use of AI techniques in contemporary video games, and discusses the AI techniques that were implemented in the development of Racer. A comparison of the AI techniques implemented in the Unity platform with traditional AI search techniques is also included in the discussion.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.316 · 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