Summarizing and Comparing Story Plans

Adam Amos-Binks, David L. Roberts, R. Young
{"title":"Summarizing and Comparing Story Plans","authors":"Adam Amos-Binks, David L. Roberts, R. Young","doi":"10.4230/OASIcs.CMN.2016.9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Branching story games have gained popularity for creating unique playing experiences by adapting story content in response to user actions. Research in interactive narrative (IN) uses automated planning to generate story plans for a given story problem. However, a story planner can generate multiple story plan solutions, all of which equally-satisfy the story problem definition but contain different story content. These differences in story content are key to understanding the story branches in a story problem's solution space, however we lack narrative-theoretic metrics to compare story plans. We address this gap by first defining a story plan summarization model to capture the important story semantics from a story plan. Secondly, we define a story plan comparison metric that compares story plans based on the summarization model. Using the Glaive narrative planner and a simple story problem, we demonstrate the usefulness of using the summarization model and distance metric to characterize the different story branches in a story problem's solution space.","PeriodicalId":311534,"journal":{"name":"Workshop on Computational Models of Narrative","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Workshop on Computational Models of Narrative","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4230/OASIcs.CMN.2016.9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Branching story games have gained popularity for creating unique playing experiences by adapting story content in response to user actions. Research in interactive narrative (IN) uses automated planning to generate story plans for a given story problem. However, a story planner can generate multiple story plan solutions, all of which equally-satisfy the story problem definition but contain different story content. These differences in story content are key to understanding the story branches in a story problem's solution space, however we lack narrative-theoretic metrics to compare story plans. We address this gap by first defining a story plan summarization model to capture the important story semantics from a story plan. Secondly, we define a story plan comparison metric that compares story plans based on the summarization model. Using the Glaive narrative planner and a simple story problem, we demonstrate the usefulness of using the summarization model and distance metric to characterize the different story branches in a story problem's solution space.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
总结和比较故事计划
分支故事游戏因根据用户行为调整故事内容,创造独特的游戏体验而广受欢迎。交互式叙事(in)的研究使用自动计划为给定的故事问题生成故事计划。然而,故事策划者可以生成多个故事计划方案,这些方案都同样满足故事问题定义,但包含不同的故事内容。故事内容的这些差异是理解故事问题解决方案空间中的故事分支的关键,然而我们缺乏叙事理论指标来比较故事计划。我们首先定义了一个故事计划总结模型来从故事计划中获取重要的故事语义,从而解决了这一差距。其次,我们定义了一个基于总结模型的故事计划比较度量。使用Glaive叙事计划和一个简单的故事问题,我们展示了使用总结模型和距离度量来描述故事问题解决空间中的不同故事分支的有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Appraisal of Computational Model for Yorùbá Folktale Narrative Comparing Extant Story Classifiers: Results & New Directions The Love Equation: Computational Modeling of Romantic Relationships in French Classical Drama Governing Narrative Events With Institutional Norms Animacy Detection in Stories
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1