MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2954024736 · doi:10.1609/aiide.v15i1.5219

Automatic Abstraction and Refinement for Simulations with Adaptive Level of Detail

2019· article· en· W2954024736 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

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Visualization and Analytics
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScope (computer science)Context (archaeology)AbstractionGraphicsHuman–computer interactionComputer graphicsInteractive simulationData scienceArtificial intelligenceSimulationProgramming languageComputer graphics (images)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optimizing the level of detail of an interactive simulation involves maximizing its perceived scope while minimizing the computational resources that are required to maintain it. Using varying levels of detail is common in computer graphics, but the challenges of doing so in simulations remain substantially less explored. The interactive simulations of video games often govern the behaviour of intelligent agents in the environment, and such behaviours can take substantial computational resources to maintain. As the ambitions of designers and players demand larger and more complex simulations, new strategies are needed to disassociate the perceived scope of a simulation with its computational needs. To this end, we propose a way to automatically adjust between different levels of detail in an interactive, narrative planning context, while simultaneously identifying and visualizing the elements that can currently be perceived.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.790
Threshold uncertainty score0.335

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.212 · 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