MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403915104 · doi:10.23977/jaip.2024.070322

Innovation and development strategy of interactive entertainment industry driven by artificial intelligence

2024· article· en· W4403915104 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Artificial Intelligence Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicE-commerce and Technology Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEntertainmentKnowledge managementComputer scienceBusinessArtificial intelligenceEngineeringEngineering managementManufacturing engineeringArtVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses the transformation and development of interactive entertainment industry driven by artificial intelligence. With the rapid development of artificial intelligence technology, it plays an increasingly important role in various fields of interactive entertainment industry. In the game industry, AI has realized the intellectualization of game characters and personalized game experience, and improved the level of game production and player satisfaction. In the film and television industry, AI has brought automated editing and special effects synthesis, as well as virtual character and scene generation, bringing a new visual experience to the audience. In the music industry, AI has shown great potential in music creation, recommendation and performance. However, AI has also brought a series of challenges to the interactive entertainment industry, such as the difficulty of understanding 3D environment and Chinese semantic processing in technical problems. In response to these challenges, some coping strategies are proposed, such as improving the accuracy of the model and strengthening the cooperation between human and AI. In short, AI has brought profound changes to the interactive entertainment industry. In the future, we should continue to explore its development direction in order to achieve continuous innovation and progress in the industry.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.668
Threshold uncertainty score0.742

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designOther design
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Artificial Intelligence PracticeSame topicE-commerce and Technology InnovationsFrench-language works237,207