Predicting User Choices in Interactive Narratives Using Indexter’s Pairwise Event Salience Hypothesis
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The Markov assumption limits story graph systems because different histories reaching the same state can imply different future actions.
“The Markov assumption is a limitation for story graph systems, because different actions leading to the same state can suggest very different future actions (Farrell and Ware 2016).”
From Multiagent Narrative Experience Management as Story Graph Pruning (2023) · cites this paper as Farrell and Ware 2016
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Multiagent Narrative Experience Management as Story Graph Pruning
Ware, S., Garcia, E. T., Fisher, M., Shirvani, A., & Farrell, R. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Games · doi:10.1109/tg.2022.3177125 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Farrell, R., & Ware, S. G.
- Affiliations
- LSU New Orleans (US)
- Corresponding author
- Farrell, Rachelyn
- Venue
- Lecture Notes in Computer Science
- Publisher
- Springer International Publishing
- Published
- 2016
- Pages
- 147-155
- ISSN
- 0302-9743 (ISSN-L)
- 1611-3349
- OpenAlex
- W2537040724
- Cited by
- 9
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 1.08
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Lecture notes in computer science (publishedVersion)
- ScholarWorks @ The University of New Orleans (The University of New Orleans) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence in Games
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Narrative Theory and Analysis
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Media Influence and Health
- Keywords
- interactive storytelling, event recall
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review