MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116343849 · doi:10.24377/dteij.article3168

A Serious Game Proposal for Raising Awareness on Sustainable Development in the Built Environment

2025· article· en· W7116343849 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLiverpool John Moores University · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational Games and Gamification
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSerious gameRelevance (law)Game designSustainable developmentVideo game developmentGame based learningSustainabilityGame DeveloperBuilt environment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interactive serious games enhance science-based communication and promote deeper learning about sustainable development. It is yet undiscovered that how can AI-augmented interactive experiences enhance the engagement and spread awareness. This study proposes an AI-augmented digital serious game in public installation format. First, the study introduces a serious board game centered on Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 11 to test the learning aspects and the engagement of the game. The study hypothesizes that a serious game with a clear message, engaging mechanics, and appealing design can significantly enhance understanding of sustainability’s relevance to everyday life. Using a Research through Design (RtD) approach, the study incorporated iterative feedback from pilot tests. These tests highlighted the effectiveness of problem-solving and group discussions in fostering engagement. The insights directly informed the design of the digital version, which emphasizes streamlined and accessible gameplay.

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 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.265 · 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