A serious gaming tool: Bow River Sim for communicating integrated water resources management
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Serious games provide a way for stakeholders to become engaged in and understand the issues and constraints on a real-world system. An application of a serious game is explored, as a way to improve engagement and learning of participants in a water management planning process. Bow River Sim is a single-player game that helps the user to understand the Water Resources Management Model (WRMM) and to visualize the implications and impacts around system interactions in the basin. The Bow River Sim simulates water management decision-making based on maximizing social, economic, and environmental benefits while managing limited water supply. The game incorporates the principles of ‘meaningful play’ and provides a user-friendly interface, a fun game, and visual elements. The paper aims to (a) provide an overview of Bow River Sim, (b) illustrate how innovations such as serious games enhance learning processes for the user, and (c) illustrate the application of Bow River Sim and key learnings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it