MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2516848845

《孤岛惊魂3》中的新鲁宾逊河流记:生存者的游戏——《孤岛惊魂3》系统点评

2013· article· zh· W2516848845 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
老黑

Bibliographic record

Venue大众软件 · 2013
Typearticle
Languagezh
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Games and Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

一座开放式的热带岛屿,对于“弧岛”系列(以下简称FC)的玩家而言并不算陌生,早在2005年的FC第一作中,我们就体验到了所谓的“Sandbox—FPS”究竟是什么样的形态。同EA分道扬镳的crytek工作室以另起炉灶的方式,重塑了一座足以将全世界游戏玩家的显卡烤得滋滋冒烟的孤岛(Crysis)。一路走来的我们,所看到的是这个封闭野生世界的面积越来越大,构造越来越复杂.植被、地形的图像效果越来越逼真。即便在如此审“岛”疲劳之下,由Ubisoft Montreal带来的第三款FC作品中所呈现的这座全新的神秘岛,依然让此类题材的老手们感受到了前所未有的震撼。

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)0.003
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.119

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.013
Scholarly communication0.0120.008
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.002

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue大众软件Same topicDigital Games and MediaFrench-language works237,207