MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2293790107 · doi:10.1109/ms.2008.5

Emotional Requirements

2008· article· en· W2293790107 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Software · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Games
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHappinessLaughterPsychologyGame designSocial psychologyPersonalityEmotional intelligenceAffect (linguistics)Cognitive psychologyComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emotional requirements must contain at least two elements: the game designer's intent (that is, the target emotional state) and the means by which the game designer expects (requires) the production team to induce that emotional state in the player. We can consider an emotional state such as happiness as universal, but the way you induce happiness isn't. Emotional requirements need context: classic pratfalls from vaudevillian theater can induce gales of laughter in a viewer who also feels horror at seeing a loved one fall. Unanticipated interactions between what the player sees, hears, and feels before or during the game can also affect the player's emotional response to stimulus, which is further conditioned by the individual's personality, culture, and life experiences.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.773
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.222 · 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