MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307717096 · doi:10.1145/3549508

NCAlt: Alternatives and Difference Visualizations for Behavior Trees in Game Development Learning

2022· article· en· W4307717096 on OpenAlexaff
Md. Yousuf Hossain, Loutfouz Zaman

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Visualization and Analytics
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUsabilityComputer sciencePlug-inWorkflowTree (set theory)Outcome (game theory)VisualizationHuman–computer interactionVideo game developmentTest (biology)Scale (ratio)MultimediaArtificial intelligenceGame designProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When learning how to develop AI behavior it is common for students to test different ideas before settling on a desired outcome. This functionality is not available in modern behavior tree systems beyond the traditional methods of duplication and conditional execution. We present NCAlt - a visual behavior authoring framework for exploring multiple game AI behaviors. The system also allows selective merging of nodes between multiple behavior tree alternatives and their visual differencing in the game scene and behavior tree views. We present two worked examples which demonstrate how NCAlt can improve the workflow of game development students. We have conducted a user study where NCAlt was compared against NodeCanvas for creating and using alternatives with moderately skilled game development students. Participants rated NCAlt 15% higher than NodeCanvas on the System Usability Scale (SUS). NCAlt was also rated higher on a self-developed questionnaire. We also conducted a semi-structured interview and a detailed longitudinal follow-up and obtained mostly positive feedback for NCAlt. The results suggest NCAlt has a potential to improve the types of workflows with behavior trees that involve exploration for game development students and facilitate learning, as a result. NCAlt was built on top of NodeCanvas - a plugin for the Unity Engine.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.677
Threshold uncertainty score0.393

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 science0.0010.001
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.296 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer InteractionSame topicData Visualization and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207