MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413802753 · doi:10.24908/iqurcp19038

Adaptation and Diegesis of Pre-Existing Music in Historically-Based Video Games

2025· article· en· W4413802753 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Avery Marcella

Bibliographic record

VenueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference Proceedings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Games and Media
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeMusicalVariety (cybernetics)Context (archaeology)Action (physics)AestheticsVisual artsArtPopular musicComputer scienceLiteratureHistoryArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The modern state of gaming has seen a variety of interactive narratives play out in a variety of worlds. A major setting of video games is ‘the past’, including historically-set games which are meant to mimic real epochs and places, all with varying degrees of accuracy to their factual counterparts. Interestingly, a pattern emerges within the soundtracks of these games: the use of pre-existing, diegetic music. As observed by scholars such as William Gibbons and Andra Ivǎnescu, such music is frequently chosen to make use of an audience’s prior musical associations within the context of the gameworld (Gibbons 2018, 43; Ivǎnescu 2019, 18-19). However, pre-existing music comes with the risk of misaligning with the player’s expectations for a given piece. Additionally, using diegetic music creates an additional risk of misalignment between the observed action and the heard sound (Neumeyer 2009, 31). Combining these two modalities could initially seem to be not worth the collective risks, but games like the historically-based Pentiment (2022) successfully integrate their audio with game narratives through careful curation of pre-existing musical works. What purpose does pre-existing music serve to warrant its widespread inclusion in historically-based games? A comparison of two works from Pentiment, the non-diegetic “Pierro’s Pride” and the diegetic “Rüdeger’s Rehearsal,” will demonstrate how diegetic music is bound by the depicted action, thereby musically reinforcing it, while non-diegetic music takes more liberties in its historical accuracy.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.446
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference ProceedingsSame topicDigital Games and MediaFrench-language works237,207