MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2293264864

Good Moods: Outlook, Affect and Mood in Dynemotion and the Mind Module

2009· article· en· W2293264864 on OpenAlexaff
Mirjam Palosaari Eladhari, Mike Sellers

Bibliographic record

VenueLoading... · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSocial Robot Interaction and HRI
Canadian institutionsAlchemy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffordanceAvatarMoodCharacter (mathematics)Human–computer interactionContext (archaeology)Computer scienceFocus (optics)Affect (linguistics)Feature (linguistics)PsychologyCognitive scienceCommunicationSocial psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article we describe two systems for autonomous characters intended to simulate the minds of characters in virtual game worlds. These systems, the Dynemotion People Engine (DPE) and the Mind Module (MM), are here presented with special focus placed on the design and implementation of the parts of the architecture that simulate what is colloquially called mood. The mood feature is presented to the user in both applications as a fine-grained matrix that summarizes the character's state of mind, typically a complex state. Thus in both systems the mood feature functions as a qualitative guide describing the affordances for the interaction with one's own avatar or another character at a given moment. This simplifies the design and balancing of game design in terms of authorial affordances and provides a more familiar context for user-character interactions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLoading...Same topicSocial Robot Interaction and HRIFrench-language works237,207