Cited by 9Artificial Intelligence in GamesNarrative Theory and AnalysisMedia Influence and Health

Predicting User Choices in Interactive Narratives Using Indexter’s Pairwise Event Salience Hypothesis

Farrell, Rachelyn, Ware, Stephen G.·2016·Lecture Notes in Computer Science

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/978-3-319-48279-8_13

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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

Authors
Farrell, R., & Ware, S. G.
Affiliations
LSU New Orleans (US)
Corresponding author
Farrell, Rachelyn
Venue
Lecture Notes in Computer Science
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