Discriminative Neural Network for Hero Selection in Professional <i>Heroes of the Storm</i> and <i>DOTA 2</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multiplayer online battle arena (MOBAs) games are one of the most popular types of online games. Annual tournaments draw large online viewership and reward the winning teams with large monetary prizes. Character selection prior to the start of the game (draft) plays a major role in the way the game is played and can give a large advantage to either team. Hence, professional teams try to maximize their winning chances by selecting the optimal team composition to counter their opponents. However, drafting is a complex process that requires deep game knowledge and preparation, which makes it stressful and error-prone. In this article, we present an automatic drafter system based on the suggestions of a discriminative neural network and evaluate how it performs on the MOBAsHeroes of the Storm (HotS)andDOTA 2. We propose a method to appropriately exploit very heterogeneous data sets that aggregates data from various versions of the games. Drafter testing on professional games shows that the actual selected hero was present in the top three determined by our drafting tool 30.4% of the time forHotSand 17.6% forDOTA 2. The performance obtained by this method exceeds all previously reported results.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".