[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
10.1145/3337722.3341849acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesfdgConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Generators that read

Published: 26 August 2019 Publication History

Abstract

Most discussions of procedural content generation have focused primarily on the artifacts that generators produce or the process by which these artifacts are created. Less focus, however, has been placed on the methods by which generators interpret their input. Many generators take complex input, act as part of a generative pipeline, are part of a mixed-initiative communication with the user, or otherwise need to take context into account during generation. In these cases, the process by which the generator reads and makes sense of its input is often just as interesting as the process by which it produces an output artifact. It is worthwhile to take a closer look at how generators read. Via a case study of two erasure poetry generators, we propose the concept of a generativist reading: a process of reading that produces generative models. Many existing generators have dual input/output or reading/writing processes that are presented as a monolithic unit, but our understanding of both processes and results is enriched when we clearly distinguish between how generators write and how they read.

References

[1]
Alan H. Barr. 1991. Teleological Modeling. In Making Them Move, Norman I. Badler, Brian A. Barsky, and David Zeltzer (Eds.). Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA, 315--321. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=111154.111171
[2]
Gabriella Alves Bulhoes Barros, Michael Green, Antonios Liapis, and Julian Togelius. 2019. Who killed Albert Einstein? From open data to murder mystery games. IEEE Transactions on Games (2019).
[3]
Amaranth Borsuk, Jesper Juul, and Nick Montfort. 2013. The Deletionist. https://thedeletionist.com. (June 2013).
[4]
C. Browne and F. Maire. 2010. Evolutionary Game Design. IEEE Transactions on Computational Intelligence and AI in Games 2, 1 (March 2010), 1--16.
[5]
Harry Caplan. 1929. The Four Senses of Scriptural Interpretation and the Mediaeval Theory of Preaching. Speculum 4, 3 (1929), 282--290. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2849551
[6]
Kate Compton, Ben Kybartas, and Michael Mateas. 2015. Tracery: An Author-Focused Generative Text Tool. In Interactive Storytelling, Henrik Schoenau-Fog, Luis Emilio Bruni, Sandy Louchart, and Sarune Baceviciute (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 154--161.
[7]
Kate Compton and Michael Mateas. 2017. A generative framework of generativity. In Experimental AI in Games Workshop 2017, at the Thirteenth Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment Conference. The AAAI Press, Palo Alto, California, Snowbird, Little Cottonwood Canyon, Utah USA. https://aaai.org/ocs/index.php/AIIDE/AIIDE17/paper/view/15896
[8]
Kate Compton, Edward Melcer, and Michael Mateas. 2017. Generominos: Ideation Cards for Interactive Generativity. In Experimental AI in Games Workshop 2017, at the Thirteenth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment. AAAI Press, Snowbird, Little Cottonwood Canyon, Utah USA. https://aaai.org/ocs/index.php/AIIDE/AIIDE17/paper/view/15898
[9]
Kate Compton, Johnathan Pagnutti, and Jim Whitehead. 2017. A shared language for creative communities of artbots. In Proceedings of the 2017 Co-Creation Workshop. Eighth International Conference on Computational Creativity, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
[10]
Jonathan Culler. 2015. Theory of the Lyric. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 6.
[11]
Umberto. Eco. 1993. Make Your Own Movie. In Misreadings. Harcourt Brace & Co., San Diego, 145--155.
[12]
Arnaud Emilien, Adrien Bernhardt, Adrien Peytavie, Marie-Paule Cani, and Eric Galin. 2012. Procedural generation of villages on arbitrary terrains. The Visual Computer 28, 6-8 (2012), 809--818.
[13]
P. Ffrench. 2012. Text. In The Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics : Fourth Edition, Roland Greene, Stephen Cushman, Clare Cavanagh, Jahan Ramazani, Paul F. Rouzer, Harris Feinsod, David Marno, Alexandra Slessarev, and Inc. ebrary (Eds.). Princeton University Press, 41 William Street, Princeton, New Jersey 08540, 1425--1426.
[14]
Jason Grinblat and Brian Bucklew. 2019. Math for Game Developers: End-to-End Procedural Generation in 'Caves of Qud'. https://www.gdcvault.com/play/1025914/Math-for-Game-Developers-End. In Game Developer's Conference 2019. San Francisco, CA USA.
[15]
Matthew Guzdial, Nicholas Liao, Jonathan Chen, Shao-Yu Chen, Shukan Shah, Vishwa Shah, Joshua Reno, Gillian Smith, and Mark Riedl. 2019. Friend, Collaborator, Student, Manager: How Design of an AI-Driven Game Level Editor Affects Creators. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI).
[16]
Sepp Hochreiter and Jürgen Schmidhuber. 1997. Long Short-Term Memory. Neural Computation 9, 8 (1997), 1735--1780.
[17]
R. Hollander. 2001. Dante: A Life in Works. Yale University Press.
[18]
Stefan Jänicke, Greta Franzini, Muhammad Faisal Cheema, and Gerik Scheuermann. 2015. On close and distant reading in digital humanities: A survey and future challenges. In Eurographics Conference on Visualization (EuroVis)-STARs. The Eurographics Association, Vol. 2. 6.
[19]
Isaac Karth and Adam M. Smith. 2017. WaveFunctionCollapse is Constraint Solving in the Wild. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games (FDG '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 68, 10 pages.
[20]
Max Kreminski. 2017. blackout. https://mkremins.github.io/blackout. (March 2017).
[21]
Yuri Lotman. 1977. The Structure of the Artistic Text. University of Michigan: Department of Slavic Languages and Literature, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
[22]
Chris Martens, Adam Summerville, Michael Mateas, Joseph Osborn, Sarah Harmon, Noah Wardrip-Fruin, and Arnav Jhala. 2016. Proceduralist readings, Procedurally. In Proceedings of the Twelfth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment. https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/AIIDE/AIIDE16/paper/view/14061
[23]
Tomas Mikolov, Kai Chen, Gregory S. Corrado, and Jeffrey Dean. 2013. Efficient Estimation of Word Representations in Vector Space. CoRR abs/1301.3781 (2013). arXiv:1301.3781.
[24]
Tomas Mikolov, Ilya Sutskever, Kai Chen, Greg Corrado, and Jeffrey Dean. 2013. Distributed Representations of Words and Phrases and Their Compositionality. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems - Volume 2 (NIPS'13). Curran Associates Inc., USA, 3111--3119. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2999792.2999959
[25]
Tomas Mikolov, Wen tau Yih, and Geoffrey Zweig. 2013. Linguistic Regularities in Continuous Space Word Representations. In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT-2013). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/publication/linguistic-regularities-in-continuous-space-word-representations/
[26]
Alexander Mordvintsev, Christopher Olah, and Mike Tyka. 2015. Inceptionism: Going deeper into neural networks. (2015).
[27]
F. Moretti and A. Piazza. 2005. Graphs, Maps, Trees: Abstract Models for a Literary History. Verso.
[28]
F. Kenton Musgrave. 2003. 14 - A brief introduction to fractals. In Texturing and Modeling (Third Edition) (third edition ed.), David S. Ebert, F. Kenton Musgrave, Darwyn Peachey, Ken Perlin, Steven Worley, William R. Mark, John C. Hart, F. Kenton Musgrave, Darwyn Peachey, Ken Perlin, and Steven Worley (Eds.). Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, 428 -- 445.
[29]
everest pipkin. 2016. A Long History of Generated Poetics: cutups from Dickinson to Melitzah. (2016). https://medium.com/@everestpipkin/a-long-history-of-generated-poetics-cutups-from-dickinson-to-melitzah-fce498083233 Archived by WebCiteÂő at http://www.webcitation.org/76fwxfAz5.
[30]
Herman Rapaport. 2011. The Literary Theory Toolkit: A Compendium of Concepts and Methods. Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester, West Sussex, United Kingdom.
[31]
B. M. Reed. 2012. Poetics, Western. In The Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics : Fourth Edition, Roland Greene, Stephen Cushman, Clare Cavanagh, Jahan Ramazani, Paul F. Rouzer, Harris Feinsod, David Marno, Alexandra Slessarev, and Inc. ebrary (Eds.). Princeton University Press, 41 William Street, Princeton, New Jersey 08540, 1058--1064. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ucsc/detail.action?docID=913846
[32]
Christoph Reinfandt. 2009. Reading Texts after the Linguistic Turn: Approaches from Literary Studies and Their Implications. In Reading Primary Sources: The Interpretation of Texts from Modern History, Benjamin Ziemann and Miriam Dobson (Eds.). Routledge, London, UK, 37--54.
[33]
Christoph Salge, Michael Cerny Green, Rodgrigo Canaan, and Julian Togelius. 2018. Generative Design in Minecraft (GDMC): Settlement Generation Competition. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games (FDG '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 49, 10 pages.
[34]
Rob Saunders and John S Gero. 2001. The digital clockwork muse: A computational model of aesthetic evolution. In Proceedings of the AISB'01 Symposium on Artificial Intelligence and Creativity in Arts and Science, Vol. 1. Citeseer, University of York, Heslington, York, YOlO 5DD, England, 12--21.
[35]
Gillian Smith, Jim Whitehead, and Michael Mateas. 2010. Tanagra: A mixed-initiative level design tool. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games. ACM, 209--216.
[36]
Adam Summerville, Chris Martens, Ben Samuel, Joseph Osborn, Noah Wardrip-Fruin, and Michael Mateas. 2018. Gemini: Bidirectional generation and analysis of games via ASP. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment (AIIDE 2018). AAAI Press.
[37]
Adam Summerville, Sam Snodgrass, Matthew Guzdial, Christoffer Holmgård, Amy K Hoover, Aaron Isaksen, Andy Nealen, and Julian Togelius. 2018. Procedural content generation via machine learning (PCGML). IEEE Transactions on Games 10, 3 (2018), 257--270.
[38]
Mike Treanor, Bobby Schweizer, Ian Bogost, and Michael Mateas. 2011. Proceduralist Readings: How to Find Meaning in Games with Graphical Logics. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Foundations of Digital Games (FDG '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 115--122.
[39]
Georgia Warnke. 2016. Hermeneutics. (Nov 2016). Published Online. Accessed 2019 April 17.
[40]
Georgios N Yannakakis, Antonios Liapis, and Constantine Alexopoulos. 2014. Mixed-initiative co-creativity. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games. Society for the Advancement of the Science of Digital Games.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Computational Poetry is Lost PoetryProceedings of the Halfway to the Future Symposium10.1145/3686169.3686179(1-4)Online publication date: 21-Oct-2024
  • (2023)“Generator’s Haunted”: A Brief, Spooky Account of Hauntological Effects in the Player Experience of Procedural GenerationProceedings of the 18th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games10.1145/3582437.3587213(1-3)Online publication date: 12-Apr-2023
  • (2021)Design-Driven Requirements for Computationally Co-Creative Game AI Design ToolsProceedings of the 16th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games10.1145/3472538.3472573(1-12)Online publication date: 3-Aug-2021
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
FDG '19: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games
August 2019
822 pages
ISBN:9781450372176
DOI:10.1145/3337722
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 26 August 2019

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. close reading
  2. context-sensitive generation
  3. erasure poetry generation
  4. generative pipelines
  5. generativist readings
  6. mixed-initiative co-creativity
  7. procedural content generation
  8. proceduralist readings
  9. reading

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

FDG '19

Acceptance Rates

FDG '19 Paper Acceptance Rate 46 of 124 submissions, 37%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 152 of 415 submissions, 37%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)24
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 01 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Computational Poetry is Lost PoetryProceedings of the Halfway to the Future Symposium10.1145/3686169.3686179(1-4)Online publication date: 21-Oct-2024
  • (2023)“Generator’s Haunted”: A Brief, Spooky Account of Hauntological Effects in the Player Experience of Procedural GenerationProceedings of the 18th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games10.1145/3582437.3587213(1-3)Online publication date: 12-Apr-2023
  • (2021)Design-Driven Requirements for Computationally Co-Creative Game AI Design ToolsProceedings of the 16th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games10.1145/3472538.3472573(1-12)Online publication date: 3-Aug-2021
  • (2021)A Genre-Specific Game Description Language for Game Boy RPGs2021 IEEE Conference on Games (CoG)10.1109/CoG52621.2021.9619109(1-8)Online publication date: 17-Aug-2021
  • (2020)10 Years of the PCG workshop: Past and Future TrendsProceedings of the 15th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games10.1145/3402942.3409598(1-10)Online publication date: 15-Sep-2020

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media