Empowering Economic Simulation for Massively Multiplayer Online Games through Generative Agent-Based Modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Within the domain of Massively Multiplayer Online (MMO) economy research, Agent-Based Modeling (ABM) has emerged as a robust tool for analyzing game economics, evolving from rule-based agents to decision-making agents enhanced by reinforcement learning. Nevertheless, existing works encounter significant challenges when attempting to emulate human-like economic activities among agents, particularly regarding agent reliability, sociability, and interpretability.In this study, we take a preliminary step in introducing a novel approach using Large Language Models (LLMs) in MMO economy simulation. Leveraging LLMs' role-playing proficiency, generative capacity, and reasoning aptitude, we design LLM-driven agents with human-like decision-making and adaptability. These agents are equipped with the abilities of role-playing, perception, memory, and reasoning, addressing the aforementioned challenges effectively. Simulation experiments focusing on in-game economic activities demonstrate that LLM-empowered agents can promote emergent phenomena like role specialization and price fluctuations in line with market rules.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".