MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2621047429 · doi:10.1287/msom.2020.0925

Incentivized Actions in Freemium Games

2020· article· en· W2621047429 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

VenueManufacturing & Service Operations Management · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCannibalizationRevenueComputer scienceSoftware deploymentIncentiveEntertainmentSet (abstract data type)Process (computing)Revenue managementMarkov decision processVariety (cybernetics)Key (lock)MarketingLicenseBusinessMicroeconomicsEconomicsMarkov processComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Problem definition: Games are the fastest-growing sector of the entertainment industry. Freemium games are the fastest-growing segment within games. The concept behind freemium is to attract large pools of players, many of whom will never spend money on the game. When game publishers cannot earn directly from the pockets of consumers, they employ other revenue-generating content, such as advertising. Players can become irritated by revenue-generating content. A recent innovation is to offer incentives for players to interact with such content, such as clicking an ad or watching a video. These are termed incentivized (incented) actions. We study the optimal deployment of incented actions. Academic/practical relevance: Removing or adding incented actions can essentially be done in real-time. Accordingly, the deployment of incented actions is a tactical, operational question for game designers. Methodology: We model the deployment problem as a Markov decision process (MDP). We study the performance of simple policies, as well as the structure of optimal policies. We use a proprietary data set to calibrate our MDP and derive insights. Results: Cannibalization—the degree to which incented actions distract players from making in-app purchases—is the key parameter for determining how to deploy incented actions. If cannibalization is sufficiently high, it is never optimal to offer incented actions. If cannibalization is sufficiently low, it is always optimal to offer. We find sufficient conditions for the optimality of threshold strategies that offer incented actions to low-engagement users and later remove them once a player is sufficiently engaged. Managerial implications: This research introduces operations management academics to a new class of operational issues in the games industry. Managers in the games industry can gain insights into when incentivized actions can be more or less effective. Game designers can use our MDP model to make data-driven decisions for deploying incented actions.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.656
Threshold uncertainty score0.690

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.200 · 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