Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

It Takes Two to Negotiate: Modeling Social Exchange in Online Multiplayer Games

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2311.08666 v1 pith:3JZMJ45G submitted 2023-11-15 cs.CL cs.GTcs.LG

It Takes Two to Negotiate: Modeling Social Exchange in Online Multiplayer Games

classification cs.CL cs.GTcs.LG
keywords gamenegotiationonlineoutcomeschatdatasetgamesmessages
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Online games are dynamic environments where players interact with each other, which offers a rich setting for understanding how players negotiate their way through the game to an ultimate victory. This work studies online player interactions during the turn-based strategy game, Diplomacy. We annotated a dataset of over 10,000 chat messages for different negotiation strategies and empirically examined their importance in predicting long- and short-term game outcomes. Although negotiation strategies can be predicted reasonably accurately through the linguistic modeling of the chat messages, more is needed for predicting short-term outcomes such as trustworthiness. On the other hand, they are essential in graph-aware reinforcement learning approaches to predict long-term outcomes, such as a player's success, based on their prior negotiation history. We close with a discussion of the implications and impact of our work. The dataset is available at https://github.com/kj2013/claff-diplomacy.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Automated versus Human Engagement: Mapping Cognitive Bias Triggers in Online Discourse

    cs.SI 2024-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Computational framework detects eight cognitive bias triggers in 3.5M COVID posts, finding bots deploy them more than humans with source-dependent engagement effects and reduced returns from multiple triggers in bot posts.