MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2611646823 · doi:10.24124/2011/bpgub751

Heuristic Path Finding Method for Online Game Environment.

2011· dissertation· en· W2611646823 on OpenAlexafffund
Jia-jia Tang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Analysis and Summarization
Canadian institutionsLibrary and Archives Canada
FundersUniversity of Northern British Columbia
KeywordsPathfindingComputer sciencePath (computing)BottleneckHeuristicHuman–computer interactionShortest path problemArtificial intelligenceTheoretical computer scienceEmbedded systemOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pathfinding is one of the main problems for computer gaming. It has long been a bottleneck for system performance in the online game industry. Due to the vast amount of pathfinding requests and attributes of game maps, many pathfinding methods that work well for the console game environment have failed the challenges of online games. In order to obtain a satisfactory performance, the background processing system has to sacrifice either efficiency or accuracy otherwise it would require a hardware improvement. Therefore, after investigating possible solutions to resolve these common issues of pathfinding, we have designed a Heuristic Path Finding Method. Under this method, designers analyze the game map structure and build area information first. The online game system will then generate path templates for in-game usage based on the map information. As the templates are being generated, the system's pathfinding Artificial Intelligence (AI) will pick a path from the templates and adjust it accordingly to produce a real path. This method improves pathfinding tasks with higher accuracy, is less time consuming and requires fewer resources from the game system. We have also created a testing system as a tool for testing and evaluating pathfinding related work. We carried out a series of experiments with the testing system on the online game service, and showed us that our method is a better solution than a few known algorithms.--P. i.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score0.739

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVideo Analysis and SummarizationFrench-language works237,207