Rapid-Play Games for Evaluating Future Technology

  • Robert SeaterEmail author
  • Joel KurucarEmail author
  • Andrew UhmeyerEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11385)


We introduce the HIVELET (Human Interactive Virtual Experimentation for Low-burden Evaluation of Technology) approach that uses rapid-play digital games to collect quantitative and qualitative data on the effectiveness, acceptance, and impact of future and emerging technologies. The core principle is for the player to alternate between two modes: selecting candidate capabilities with a game theoretic limiting pressure, and executing a simulated mission using those selections in a virtual environment. Alternating between the two modes allows us to collect quantitative data on performance and preferences, improve the trustworthiness of qualitative feedback, and increase the chance of discovering novel uses. We report on preliminary results from applying the HIVELET in a military context.


Technology evaluation Experimental results Requirements analysis Gamification 


  1. 1.
    Dixon, A., Henning, J.: Nett Warrior Gets New End-User Device (2013). Accessed 20 Sept 2018
  2. 2.
    Hern, A.: US marines reject BigDog robotic packhorse because it’s too noisy. The Guardian (2015). Accessed 20 Sept 2018
  3. 3.
    Klein, G.: Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions. MIT Press, Cambridge (1998)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Terwiesch, C., Ulrich, K.T.: Innovation Tournaments: Creating and Selecting Exceptional Opportunities. Boston Harvard Business Press, Boston (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Allen, G., Chan, T.: Artificial Intelligence and National Security. Study on behalf of the US Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA). Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Cambridge MA (2017). Accessed 20 Sept 2018
  6. 6.
    U.S. Naval War College: War Gaming. U.S. Naval War College, Newport (2017). Accessed 20 Sept 2018
  7. 7.
    Burns, S., Del la Volpe, D., Babb, R., Miller, N., Muir, G. (eds.): War Gamers Handbook: A Guide for Professional War Gamers. U.S. Naval War College, Newport (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kato, P.M., Cole, S.W., Bradlyn, A.S., Pollock, B.H.: A video game improves behavioral outcomes in adolescents and young adults with cancer: a randomized trial. Pediatrics 122(2), e305–e317 (2008). Scholar
  9. 9.
    Suarez, P.: Games for a New Climate: Experiencing the Complexities of Future Risks. Boston University Frederick S. Pardee Center for the Study of the Longer-Range Future Task Force Report, Boston MA (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liu, A.: Decentralized Network Interdiction Games. Air Force Research Laboratory: AF Office Of Scientific Research (AFOSR)/RTA2, Arlington VA (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Allain, R.J.: An Evolving Asymmetric Game for Modeling Interdictor-Smuggler Problems. Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey (2016)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Burgun, K.: Clockwork Game Design. Focal Press, Burlington (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Elias, G.S., Garfield, R., Gutschera, K.R.: Characteristics of Games. MIT Press, Cambridge (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gombolay, M.C., Jensen, R., Stigile, J., Son, S., Shah, J.: Apprenticeship scheduling: learning to schedule from human experts. In: Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Seater, R., Rose, C., Norige, A., McCarthy, J., Kozar, M., DiPastina, P.: Skill Transfer and Virtual Training for IND Response Decision Making: Game Design for Disaster Response Training. MIT Lincoln Laboratory Technical Report 1207, Lexington MA (2016)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lincoln LaboratoryLexingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations