Saturday, February 14, 2026

art

license: public domain CC0


Design Document: Multi-Scale Neural Network Visualization via CA, Voxels, and Fractal Compression


1. Overview

This document defines a high-performance, multi-scale visualization framework for representing the internal state of deep neural networks using:

  • Cellular automata (CA)

  • 3D voxel grids

  • Subpixel and multi-resolution compression

  • Fractal-inspired scaling derived from network weights and dynamics

The framework converts high-dimensional tensors (activations, weights, gradients, attention maps) into structured, recursively compressed visual fields capable of scaling to billion-parameter models.

The system supports:

  • Static snapshots (single forward pass)

  • Time evolution (training iterations)

  • Layer transitions

  • CA-driven emergent visualizations

  • Recursive zoom / fractal exploration

The architecture is model-agnostic (CNNs, transformers, MLPs, diffusion models, etc.).


2. Objectives

2.1 Interpretability

Provide structured visibility into:

  • Activation sparsity patterns

  • Feature hierarchies

  • Attention clustering

  • Gradient flow and vanishing/exploding behavior

  • Residual path dominance

  • Spectral structure of weight matrices

Interpretability goal: expose structure, not raw magnitude.


2.2 Scalability

Target constraints:

  • Handle ≥10⁹ parameters

  • Maintain interactive performance (30–60 FPS for moderate models)

  • Support progressive refinement

Strategies:

  • Hierarchical spatial compression

  • Tensor factorization (PCA/SVD)

  • Block quantization

  • Octree voxelization

  • Multi-resolution caching


2.3 Artistic and Structural Insight

Neural networks inherently exhibit:

  • Recursive composition

  • Hierarchical feature reuse

  • Spectral decay

  • Self-similar clustering

  • Power-law distributions

The system intentionally leverages these properties to produce fractal-like representations grounded in real model statistics.


3. System Architecture


3.1 Data Sources

3.1.1 Activation Capture

Implementation (PyTorch example conceptually):

  • Register forward hooks on modules

  • Capture:

    • Input tensor

    • Output tensor

    • Intermediate states (if needed)

Memory constraints:

  • For large models, stream activations layer-by-layer.

  • Use half precision (FP16/BF16).

  • Optionally detach and move to CPU asynchronously.


3.1.2 Gradients

Use backward hooks or register_full_backward_hook.

Store:

  • dL/dW

  • dL/dX

  • Gradient norms

  • Gradient sign maps

Optionally compute:

[
||\nabla W||_F, \quad ||\nabla X||_2
]

These become color or intensity drivers.


3.1.3 Weight Statistics

Precompute per layer:

  • Frobenius norm

  • Spectral norm (via power iteration)

  • Singular values (top-k)

  • Channel norms

  • Kernel norms

  • Sparsity ratio

  • Weight distribution histogram

Cache results for rendering.


3.1.4 Attention Matrices

For transformer layers:

Extract:

[
A \in \mathbb{R}^{H \times N \times N}
]

Where:

  • H = number of heads

  • N = sequence length

Store:

  • Mean across heads

  • Per-head matrices

  • Symmetrized attention

  • Eigenvalues of A


3.1.5 Jacobians (Optional)

Expensive but powerful.

Approximate Jacobian norm via:

[
||J||_F^2 = \sum_i ||\frac{\partial y}{\partial x_i}||^2
]

Efficient approximation:

  • Hutchinson trace estimator

  • Random projection methods

Used to visualize sensitivity fields.


3.2 Processing Pipeline


Stage 1 — Tensor Acquisition

Normalize tensors per layer:

Options:

  1. Min-max scaling

  2. Z-score normalization

  3. Robust scaling (median + MAD)

  4. Log scaling for heavy-tailed distributions

Recommended default:

[
x' = \tanh(\alpha x)
]

Prevents outlier domination.


Stage 2 — Dimensionality Compression


CNN Feature Maps

Input shape:
[
B \times C \times H \times W
]

Steps:

  1. Aggregate batch:

    • mean across B

  2. Compute:

    • mean activation per channel

    • variance per channel

  3. Reduce channels:

    • PCA across C

    • Top 3 components → RGB

Optional:

  • Spatial pooling pyramid:

    • 1/2×

    • 1/4×

    • 1/8×

Store as mipmap pyramid.


MLP Activations

Vector shape:
[
B \times D
]

Options:

  • Reshape D into 2D grid (nearest square)

  • PCA to 3 components

  • Use block averaging

  • Spectral embedding


Attention Compression

Compute recursive powers:

[
A^{(2^k)} = A^{(2^{k-1})} \cdot A^{(2^{k-1})}
]

Normalize at each step.

This produces long-range interaction amplification.

Also compute:

  • Laplacian:
    [
    L = D - A
    ]

  • Eigenvectors for cluster visualization.


Stage 3 — Fractal Scaling


3.3.1 Weight Norm Scaling

For each layer:

[
s_L = ||W_L||_F
]

For each channel:

[
s_c = ||W_{L,c}||
]

Use scaling factor:

[
\tilde{x} = x \cdot \frac{s_c}{\max(s_c)}
]

Maps structural importance to visual prominence.


3.3.2 Spectral Scaling

Compute top singular values:

[
\sigma_1 \ge \sigma_2 \ge \dots
]

Define recursive zoom depth:

[
depth \propto \log(\sigma_1 / \sigma_k)
]

High spectral dominance → deeper fractal recursion.


3.3.3 Residual Path Branching

For networks with skip connections:

Represent each residual branch as a child region in CA or voxel tree.

Branch width ∝ branch weight norm.

This creates visible branching trees.


3.3.4 Jacobian Field Visualization

Map:

  • Jacobian norm → brightness

  • Largest singular vector direction → color angle

Results often produce ridge-like structures in input space.


4. Compression Techniques


4.1 Subpixel Encoding

Each pixel subdivided into:

  • 2×2 grid or 3×3 microcells

Encode:

  • Mean

  • Variance

  • Gradient magnitude

  • Sign ratio

Use bit-packing for GPU upload:

Example:

  • 8 bits mean

  • 8 bits variance

  • 8 bits gradient

  • 8 bits sign entropy

Packed into RGBA texture.


4.2 Octree Voxelization

Data structure:

Node:
    bounds
    mean_activation
    variance
    children[8]

Merge rule:

If:
[
|a_i - a_j| < \epsilon
]

And variance below threshold → collapse children.

Provides O(N log N) construction.


4.3 Density-Aware Merging

Define density:

[
\rho = |activation|
]

High ρ:

  • Subdivide

Low ρ:

  • Merge

Adaptive voxel resolution.


4.4 Multi-Resolution Blending

Algorithm:

  1. Downsample tensor via average pooling

  2. Upsample via bilinear

  3. Blend:

[
x_{blend} = \lambda x + (1-\lambda)x_{up}
]

Repeat recursively.

Produces controlled fractal texture.


5. Cellular Automaton Layer

Each CA cell contains:

struct Cell:
    activation_mean
    activation_variance
    gradient_mean
    weight_scale
    spectral_scale

Neighborhood:

  • Moore (8-neighbor)

  • 3D 26-neighbor (voxels)

Update rule example:

[
x_{t+1} = f(x_t, \text{neighbor mean}, \text{gradient}, \text{weight scale})
]

Possible update equation:

[
x' = x + \alpha \cdot \Delta_{neighbors}
]
[
x' = x' \cdot (1 + \beta \cdot weight_scale)
]

Optionally nonlinear activation (ReLU/tanh).

Can be:

  • Hand-crafted

  • Learned (Neural CA)


6. Voxel Rendering


6.1 Mapping Strategy

Dimension mapping examples:

  • X,Y → spatial

  • Z → channel index

  • Brightness → activation

  • Hue → gradient direction

  • Opacity → weight norm


6.2 GPU Rendering

Recommended:

  • OpenGL / Vulkan

  • WebGL for browser

  • CUDA volume ray marching

Techniques:

  • 3D textures

  • Ray marching with early termination

  • Transfer functions for opacity

  • Instanced cube rendering for sparse voxels

Acceleration:

  • Frustum culling

  • Level-of-detail switching

  • Sparse voxel octrees


7. Color Encoding


7.1 Diverging Maps

Map:

[
x < 0 → blue
]
[
x > 0 → red
]

Gamma correct before display.


7.2 PCA → RGB

Compute PCA:

[
X \rightarrow U \Sigma V^T
]

Take first 3 columns of UΣ.

Normalize per component.

Map to RGB.


7.3 HSV Gradient Encoding

Hue:
[
\theta = \text{atan2}(g_y, g_x)
]

Saturation:
[
||\nabla||
]

Value:
[
|activation|
]


8. Rendering Modes


8.1 Static

  • Single layer spectral map

  • Attention fractal heatmap

  • Weight norm landscape

  • Voxel activation cloud


8.2 Animated

  • Training evolution over epochs

  • Gradient flow over time

  • CA emergent patterns

  • Recursive zoom via spectral scale


8.3 Interactive

User controls:

  • Layer selection

  • Head selection

  • Compression threshold

  • Spectral depth

  • Toggle raw vs scaled

  • Voxel slicing plane

Add inspection overlay:

  • Hover → show tensor statistics

  • Click → show singular values


9. Performance Considerations


9.1 Memory

  • Use FP16 where possible

  • Stream tensors instead of storing entire model

  • Compress PCA bases


9.2 Parallelism

  • GPU for voxel + CA

  • CPU for PCA/SVD (or cuSOLVER)

  • Async prefetch


9.3 Caching

Cache:

  • Downsample pyramids

  • PCA bases per layer

  • Weight norms

  • Spectral norms

Invalidate cache when model updates.


10. Stability & Safety

  • Always normalize before visualization.

  • Clamp extreme outliers.

  • Provide legends and numeric scales.

  • Separate aesthetic exaggeration from faithful mode.

  • Provide “scientific mode” toggle (no scaling distortions).


11. Future Extensions

  • Learned Neural CA visualizers

  • VR exploration of voxel space

  • Differentiable visualization loss

  • Integration with experiment tracking systems

  • Spectral topology analysis

  • Persistent homology overlays


12. Implementation Roadmap (High-Level)

Phase 1

  • Activation capture

  • PCA compression

  • 2D heatmap renderer

Phase 2

  • Multi-resolution pyramid

  • Octree voxelization

  • GPU volume rendering

Phase 3

  • Spectral scaling

  • Attention recursion

  • CA evolution engine

Phase 4

  • Interactive UI

  • Training-time animation

  • VR or WebGL deployment



Friday, February 13, 2026

license: public domain CC0.

Game Mechanics Morphing with Controlled Natural Languages (CNLs)

Design Document


1. Overview

This document outlines the design of a Game Mechanics Morphing system using Controlled Natural Languages (CNLs) to describe the mechanics of different classic arcade games. The primary idea is to create a highly structured space where different games' mechanics are represented as points, allowing them to be smoothly morphed, blended, and interpolated. This allows for the evolution of game mechanics or the creation of hybrid games through gradual, controlled transitions between different game styles, all while maintaining coherence and preventing drift into unrelated or nonsensical mechanics.


2. Key Concepts

Controlled Natural Language (CNL)

A Controlled Natural Language (CNL) is a restricted, formalized subset of natural language (English) designed to express complex concepts unambiguously. It is machine-readable and human-readable and allows for structured descriptions of game mechanics without the complexity and variability of full natural language. CNLs are used to describe game entities, actions, behaviors, and rules.

In this design, multiple CNLs are created to represent different classic arcade game genres (e.g., Space Invaders, Asteroids, Missile Command). Each CNL captures the core mechanics of a specific game.

Game Mechanics Morphing

Morphing refers to the process of interpolating, blending, or transitioning between different game rules, structures, and mechanics. By treating each CNL as a point in a high-dimensional space, we can create smooth transitions between game mechanics. This allows the system to blend game styles or gradually shift the rules of one game into another, producing hybrid or entirely new gameplay experiences.


3. System Architecture

3.1 Components

The overall architecture for the game mechanics morphing system consists of the following components:

  1. CNL Definitions
    CNLs define the mechanics, behaviors, and rules of individual arcade games using a controlled vocabulary and grammar.

  2. CNL Morphing Engine
    The morphing engine is responsible for blending different CNLs by interpolating:

    • Sentence-level blending: Modifying specific actions or behaviors.

    • Vocabulary-level blending: Gradually swapping out terms and actions.

    • Grammar-level blending: Shifting sentence structures or behaviors.

  3. Game State Representation
    Game states are represented in a structured format (e.g., JSON or a similar schema) that captures entities, actions, and behaviors.

  4. Simulation Engine
    The simulation engine interprets the game mechanics as defined by the CNL and executes the game in real-time. It receives inputs, updates the game state, and handles interactions between entities (e.g., collisions, movements).

  5. Human Interface
    A human interface allows developers or users to interact with the system, either to control the morphing process or explore hybrid games.


3.2 CNLs for Arcade Games

Each arcade game has its own distinct CNL that defines its mechanics. Below is a brief overview of the core elements in the CNLs for different games:

Space Invaders CNL

  • Entities: player ship, enemies, bullets

  • Behaviors: enemies move horizontally, descend when hitting boundary, player fires bullets

  • Collision rules: enemy destroyed when hit by bullet

  • Movement rules: horizontal enemy movement, boundary checks, descent

Asteroids CNL

  • Entities: ship, asteroid, bullet

  • Behaviors: ship rotates, thrusts, asteroid splits on hit

  • Movement rules: ship velocity, asteroid drift, wrap-around on boundaries

  • Collision rules: asteroid splits when hit, bullet disappears on impact

Missile Command CNL

  • Entities: cities, missiles, interceptors, explosions

  • Behaviors: missile follows trajectory, interceptor explodes, city destroyed when hit

  • Movement rules: missile and interceptor trajectories

  • Collision rules: missiles are destroyed within explosion radius, cities destroyed on impact

Frogger CNL

  • Entities: frog, lanes, cars, logs

  • Behaviors: frog moves between lanes, logs act as platforms

  • Collision rules: frog dies when colliding with car, frog hops across lanes


4. Morphing Process

The morphing engine allows us to transition from one CNL to another by interpolating between different rule sets, vocabularies, and sentence structures. The core morphing techniques are:

4.1 Structural Interpolation (Rule-Level Blending)

At the core of the morphing process is the blending of specific rules. For example:

  • Space Invaders rule: Each enemy moves horizontally by 1 cell each tick.

  • Galaxian rule: Each enemy moves in a diving arc toward the player.

Intermediate:
Each enemy moves horizontally but may begin a shallow arc toward the player.

This allows for a gradual blending of behaviors, preserving the game mechanics of both while introducing new dynamics.

4.2 Vocabulary Interpolation (Lexical Blending)

Blending different terminologies or vocabulary terms is a crucial aspect. As rules evolve, we can gradually replace one term with another to signify different game mechanics:

  • Start with "enemy formation" in Space Invaders.

  • Transition to "enemy squadron" and introduce terms like "leaders," "wingmen".

  • Eventually, "enemy formation" becomes "enemy squadron" in Galaxian, introducing behaviors like leaders diving.

4.3 Sentence Pattern Interpolation (Grammar-Level Blending)

The syntax and grammar of each CNL are also subject to blending. For instance:

  • Space Invaders template:
    If any enemy reaches a boundary then all enemies descend by 1 row.

  • Galaxian template:
    Enemies break formation and dive toward the player.

Intermediate:
If any enemy reaches a boundary, some enemies break formation and dive toward the player.


5. Example of Morphing Across Multiple Game Styles

Let's explore an example of morphing across three distinct game styles: Space Invaders, Galaxian, and Phoenix.

Step 1: Pure Space Invaders CNL

Enemies move horizontally by 1 cell each tick.
If any enemy reaches a boundary then all enemies descend by 1 row.
The player fires a bullet when commanded.
If a bullet occupies the same cell as an enemy, the enemy is destroyed.

Step 2: Introducing Galaxian Vocabulary

Enemies move horizontally by 1 cell each tick.
Some enemies are leaders.
If any leader reaches a boundary, all enemies descend by 1 row.
The player fires a bullet when commanded.
If a bullet occupies the same cell as an enemy, the enemy is destroyed.

Step 3: Blending Movement Rules (Space Invaders → Galaxian)

Enemies move horizontally, but leaders may begin a shallow dive toward the player.
If any leader reaches a boundary, all enemies descend by 1 row.
The player fires a bullet when commanded.
If a bullet occupies the same cell as an enemy, the enemy is destroyed.

Step 4: Shifting Toward Phoenix Behavior

Enemies move in formation, but leaders may dive toward the player.
If a leader dives, wingmen may follow.
Enemies shoot bullets when descending toward the player.

Step 5: Pure Phoenix CNL

Enemies move in formation.
Leaders dive toward the player, wingmen follow in arcs.
Enemies shoot bullets when descending toward the player.

6. Why This Works

Controlled Transition

The CNL-based approach ensures that during the morphing process, the LLM stays grounded. The strict constraints on vocabulary, grammar, and structure ensure that each transition adheres to the rules, preventing the system from drifting into nonsensical or unrelated game mechanics.

Smooth Interpolation

By interpolating at different levels (structural, vocabulary, grammar), we can control the smoothness and gradual nature of the transitions, ensuring the game mechanics evolve at a steady pace, keeping both playability and game coherence intact.

Extensibility

New game mechanics or hybrids can be easily integrated. For example, blending mechanics from a missile-defense game with platformer mechanics or creating a new game genre by combining lane-based movement with arcade shooter elements.


7. Next Steps and Ideas

7.1 Meta-CNL for Cross-Game Morphing

To further extend the morphing process, a meta-CNL could be created that provides a high-level language for switching between different game genres. This would allow for:

  • Defining broad families of games (e.g., grid-based, arcade-shooter, action-adventure) and transitioning between them.

  • Enabling game genre evolution, where new genres can be created by morphing core mechanics from different styles.

7.2 Integrating Hybrid Gameplay Creation

Allow the system to generate hybrid game genres based on the morphing process. Developers or players could select a starting point and then guide the system to create entirely

new gameplay experiences.


8. Conclusion

By using Controlled Natural Languages (CNLs) to define and morph the mechanics of arcade games, this system allows for the smooth and controlled evolution of game rules and styles. The CNLs ensure the system stays grounded, with clear, interpretable rules that can be gradually changed and blended. This opens up new possibilities for game creation, hybrid mechanics, and even evolving game genres — all within a coherent and structured framework.


dope smokin' morphin power rangerin'

license: public domain CC0.

 

Once you have multiple CNLs, each describing a different arcade game family, you can treat them as points in a conceptual space — and that means you can interpolate, morph, and blend them just like you would blend images or sounds. The result is a controlled, gradual transformation from one ruleset to another, with the LLM staying grounded because the vocabulary and grammar remain constrained.

Let’s break down how this works and why it’s so compelling.


🎮 The Big Idea: A “Game Morphing Space” Built From CNLs

Each CNL is a structured description of a game’s mechanics. If you represent those mechanics as:

  • entities
  • behaviors
  • movement rules
  • collision rules
  • scoring rules
  • world structure

…then each game becomes a vector in a high‑dimensional rule space.

Once you have that, you can:

  • interpolate between rule vectors
  • blend vocabularies
  • gradually rewrite sentences
  • shift constraints over time

This gives you a smooth morph from:

Space Invaders → Galaxian → Phoenix → Terra Cresta → …

And because each step stays inside a controlled grammar, the LLM doesn’t drift into nonsense.


🧩 How to Interpolate Between Two CNLs

There are three complementary approaches, and you can use them together.


1. Structural Interpolation (Rule-Level Blending)

Each CNL sentence maps to a structured rule. For example:

Space Invaders:

Each enemy moves horizontally by 1 cell each tick.

Galaxian:

Each enemy moves in a diving arc toward the player.

A structural interpolation might produce:

Intermediate:

Each enemy moves horizontally but may begin a downward arc toward the player.

This is a semantic blend of the two rules.


2. Vocabulary Interpolation (Lexical Blending)

Each CNL has a restricted vocabulary. You can gradually introduce new terms while phasing out old ones.

Example:

  • Start with “enemy formation”
  • Introduce “enemy squadron”
  • Replace “formation” with “squadron”
  • Introduce “diver”, “leader”, “wingman”
  • Remove “formation” entirely

This keeps the LLM grounded while shifting the conceptual frame.


3. Sentence Pattern Interpolation (Grammar-Level Blending)

Each CNL has its own grammar templates. You can gradually replace templates.

Example:

Space Invaders template:

If any enemy reaches a boundary then all enemies descend by <int> rows.

Galaxian template:

Enemies break formation and dive toward the player.

Intermediate template:

If an enemy reaches a boundary then some enemies break formation and dive.

This creates a smooth transition in behavior.


🧬 How the LLM Stays Grounded

Because each CNL:

  • has a fixed grammar
  • has a fixed vocabulary
  • maps to structured rules
  • is validated by a parser

…the LLM can’t drift into unrelated concepts. Even during interpolation, it must stay within the allowed forms.

You can even enforce:

  • “Only use vocabulary from CNL A or CNL B”
  • “Only use grammar templates from these sets”
  • “Only modify one rule per interpolation step”

This gives you a controlled morphing process.


🔄 A Concrete Example: Space Invaders → Galaxian

Step 0: Pure Space Invaders

Enemies move horizontally by 1 cell each tick.
If any enemy reaches a boundary then all enemies descend by 1 row.

Step 1: Introduce Galaxian vocabulary

Enemies move horizontally by 1 cell each tick.
Some enemies are leaders.
If any leader reaches a boundary then all enemies descend by 1 row.

Step 2: Blend movement rules

Enemies move horizontally but leaders may begin a shallow dive.
If any leader reaches a boundary then all enemies descend by 1 row.

Step 3: Shift toward Galaxian behavior

Enemies move in formation but leaders may dive toward the player.
If a leader dives then wingmen may follow.

Step 4: Pure Galaxian

Enemies move in formation.
Leaders dive toward the player and wingmen follow in arcs.

This is a clean, readable morph.


🧠 Extending This to All Six Games

You can build a graph of CNLs, not just a line:

Space Invaders → Galaxian → Phoenix → Terra Cresta
Asteroids → Defender
Frogger → Pac-Man (lane-based → maze-based)
Missile Command → (branching into artillery-style games)

Each edge in the graph defines a morph path.

You can even let the LLM:

  • explore the space
  • generate hybrids
  • invent new arcade genres

…while staying inside the CNL constraints.


🎨 Why This Is So Interesting

You’re essentially creating:

  • a morphable ruleset space
  • a controlled creative engine
  • a grammar for game evolution
  • a tool for generating new retro-style games
  • a framework for LLM-driven game mutation

It’s like procedural generation, but for game mechanics, not just levels.

And because the CNL is readable, humans can understand and edit the morphs.


This idea is incredibly intriguing! You're building a game mechanics morphing engine using Controlled Natural Languages (CNLs), which allows for blending the rules of different arcade games in a controlled and structured way. The approach leverages structured rules and grammar to prevent the LLM from veering into irrelevant territory, ensuring a smooth, coherent transition between game mechanics.

Here are some critical insights, suggestions, and potential improvements to refine the design:


1. Clarity on "Interpreting" and "Morphing" the Rules

You are right to focus on creating a smooth, controlled transition between game rules, but the actual mechanics of how the LLM interprets and morphs the rules could use some clarification.

Possible Problem: "Morphing" may sound abstract.

  • Solution: You might want to explicitly define the underlying steps for the LLM to follow while morphing between CNLs. For example:

    • Does it morph each sentence at a time, or are larger rule groups (like behaviors, movement rules) morphed first?

    • How do you avoid confusing or inconsistent rules during the transition? (For example, when a “leader” starts to dive in Galaxian, how does this affect the “boundary” behavior in Space Invaders?)

Suggested Fix:

  • Outline the precise algorithm for morphing rules step-by-step. For example, you might say:

    • Step 1: Interpolate a rule’s subject or action first (e.g., change “enemy moves horizontally” to “enemy moves in formation”).

    • Step 2: Blend complementary rules (e.g., introduce the concept of “leaders” but still retain the original boundary behavior until later).

    • Step 3: Once structural transitions are stable, shift the behavior itself (e.g., replace horizontal movement with arc-like movement for some enemies).

2. Exploring CNL Transitions Between Different Game Types

Your example of Space Invaders → Galaxian works well, but when considering other games, transitions could become more complex due to differing game structures. The concept of Frogger → Pac-Man (lane-based → maze-based) is intriguing but tricky to manage because:

  • Frogger works with discrete lanes and obstacle patterns, while Pac-Man uses a continuous maze.

  • Missile Command → Artillery games implies different environmental dynamics (missiles vs projectiles, aiming mechanics).

Potential Issue: CNL-based transitions might break down when morphing between fundamentally different types of mechanics (e.g., from discrete grid-based games to continuous space games).

Suggested Fix:

  • Consider adding an additional meta-CNL layer that can handle the transition between different types of world structure (grid-based vs continuous space). This could help establish a bridge between fundamentally different gameplay experiences.


3. Defining the Granularity of Interpolation

The description of structural, vocabulary, and grammar-level blending is powerful, but you may need to more clearly define the granularity of these interpolations.

  • Granularity: When you blend between two rules or vocabularies, how much detail do you maintain at each step? Do you interpolate in big chunks (e.g., “move left” to “move in formation”) or small ones (e.g., adjusting positions of individual entities)?

Suggested Fix:

  • Add guidelines to specify the level of abstraction for each interpolation step:

    • Granularity 1: Sentence-level changes, blending specific actions (e.g., moving left to moving diagonally).

    • Granularity 2: Entity-level changes, shifting the behavior of an entire class of objects (e.g., enemies as leaders in Galaxian).

    • Granularity 3: Rule-level changes, shifting the core game mechanics (e.g., from shooting enemies to dodging asteroids).

4. Fine-Tuning the Vocabulary and Grammar

You're introducing new terms like “leader,” “wingman,” and “squadron” in the example of Space Invaders → Galaxian, which helps introduce Galaxian concepts gradually. However, there’s a risk of vocabulary overlap that may confuse the LLM (e.g., "formation" could clash with "squadron").

Potential Issue: As you blend vocabularies, ensuring that no terms are ambiguous or redundant is key for maintaining control.

Suggested Fix:

  • Maintain a vocabulary map that tracks words as they transition. For instance:

    • Map "formation""squadron".

    • Ensure that each new word introduced is only applied once and with precise definitions to prevent confusion.

Alternatively, you could phase out older terms once the new term has been fully integrated.


5. Addressing Edge Cases and Uncertainty During Morphing

As the LLM morphs between game rules, edge cases may arise that weren't explicitly accounted for in the original rulesets. For instance, what if a rule behaves in an unexpected way, like an enemy trying to "dive" without sufficient boundary checks?

Suggested Fix:

  • Introduce a mechanism to flag and resolve edge cases during morphing. For example:

    • If a new rule violates an old one, allow the LLM to “flag” this as a transitional error and prompt for corrective behavior (e.g., revert to the old rule for consistency, or ask for a more specific definition).

    • Alternatively, introduce fallback rules when ambiguities arise in behavior.


6. Creativity and Control in the Hybrid Space

The concept of hybrid games—where the LLM creates novel game mechanics by blending existing ones—is incredibly exciting. However, the challenge is ensuring that these hybrids still make sense in terms of playability and coherence.

Potential Issue: The LLM might invent game rules that feel inconsistent with the original arcade style (e.g., blending Missile Command with Frogger could create strange mechanics that don’t work well together).

Suggested Fix:

  • Introduce playability checks: The system could be designed to evaluate the novelty and playability of hybrid games at each interpolation step. For example, after a morph step, the LLM might run a simulation to check if the gameplay feels balanced and enjoyable.

  • Game-style filters: Allow the LLM to blend between games within a family (e.g., between different space-shooters) rather than entirely different genres (like blending a puzzle game with an action game). This keeps the hybrid mechanics cohesive.


7. Adding Interactivity in the Morphing Process

One key strength of this system is its ability to evolve games gradually. However, introducing human interaction into the process could be valuable.

Suggested Fix:

  • Allow human developers or players to “steer” the morphing by selecting preferred transitions or suggesting new game mechanics, making the experience interactive and dynamic. This could be useful in generating completely new genres or hybrid gameplay styles.


Final Thoughts: Enhancing the Vision

Overall, you're building a framework that has the potential to enable game mechanics evolution in a controlled and creative way. The key improvements are:

  • Defining the level of granularity in the interpolation process.

  • Ensuring vocabulary consistency and preventing overlap.

  • Adding checks for edge cases and hybrid playability.

  • Offering interactivity for developers to guide the morphing process.

With these refinements, the concept could become a truly powerful tool for creating procedurally generated, hybrid arcade games while maintaining coherence and control.

cnl video game library

license: public domain CC0.

 

You can build multiple CNLs, each tailored to a specific classic arcade game. In fact, this is exactly the kind of structure that keeps an LLM grounded, prevents rule‑drift, and gives human designers a clean, readable way to define game logic.

Let’s walk through how this works and then I’ll sketch six separate CNLs, each tuned to the mechanics of a different game.


🎮 Why build multiple CNLs instead of one universal one?

Each of the games you listed has a distinct mechanical grammar:

  • Space Invaders → grid, formations, downward pressure, bullets
  • Asteroids → continuous space, rotation, inertia, wraparound
  • Missile Command → trajectories, explosions, interception arcs
  • Frogger → lanes, moving obstacles, discrete hops
  • Defender/Stargate → scrolling world, radar, abductors, rescue logic
  • Pac‑Man → maze, pellets, ghosts with AI modes

Trying to force all of these into one CNL would either:

  • become too abstract to be useful, or
  • become too complex for an LLM to reliably follow.

Instead, you create six small, tight CNLs, each with:

  • a restricted vocabulary
  • a restricted grammar
  • a domain‑specific ontology
  • a clear mapping to structured state

This is exactly how ACE works: domain‑specific micro‑languages.


🧠 Can an LLM stick to a CNL?

Yes — if you give it:

  • a glossary
  • a grammar
  • examples
  • a system prompt that enforces the rules
  • a validator that rejects invalid sentences

LLMs are very good at staying inside a constrained language when the constraints are explicit.


🧩 Now let’s design the six CNLs

Below are concise but concrete CNL definitions for each game type. Each includes:

  • Vocabulary
  • Sentence patterns
  • Example spec fragments

These are starting points — you can expand them as needed.


1) Space Invaders CNL

Vocabulary

player ship, enemy, formation, bullet, shield
row, column, grid
move, fire, descend, destroy
left, right, up, down
tick, boundary

Grammar (examples)

There is a player ship at row <int> column <int>.
There are <int> enemies in row <int>.
Each enemy moves horizontally by <int> cells each tick.
If any enemy reaches a boundary then all enemies descend by <int> rows.
The player ship fires a bullet when the action FIRE occurs.
If a bullet occupies the same cell as an enemy then the enemy is destroyed.

Example spec

The grid has 15 rows and 10 columns.
There is a player ship at row 1 column 5.
There are 20 enemies in rows 10 to 12.
Each enemy moves horizontally by 1 cell each tick.
If any enemy reaches a boundary then all enemies descend by 1 row.

2) Asteroids CNL

Vocabulary

ship, asteroid, fragment, bullet
position, velocity, angle, rotation
wrap, thrust, split

Grammar

The ship has position <float,float> and angle <float>.
The ship rotates by <float> degrees when commanded.
The ship applies thrust to change velocity.
An asteroid moves according to its velocity.
If a bullet hits an asteroid then the asteroid splits into <int> fragments.
If an object crosses a boundary then it wraps to the opposite side.

Example spec

The ship starts at position (0,0) with angle 0.
Asteroids drift with constant velocity.
If a bullet hits an asteroid then the asteroid splits into 2 fragments.
Objects wrap at all boundaries.

3) Missile Command CNL

Vocabulary

city, silo, missile, interceptor, explosion
trajectory, arc, target, radius
launch, intercept, destroy

Grammar

A missile travels along a straight trajectory toward a city.
A silo launches an interceptor when commanded.
An interceptor creates an explosion with radius <float>.
If a missile enters an explosion radius then the missile is destroyed.
If a missile reaches a city then the city is destroyed.

Example spec

There are 6 cities.
Missiles spawn at the top with random trajectories.
Interceptors explode with radius 1.5.
If a missile enters an explosion radius then the missile is destroyed.

4) Frogger CNL

Vocabulary

frog, lane, car, log, river, goal
move, hop, collide, ride
left, right, forward, backward

Grammar

The frog starts in lane <int>.
Cars move left or right by <int> cells each tick.
Logs move left or right by <int> cells each tick.
If the frog is on a log then the frog moves with the log.
If the frog collides with a car then the frog dies.
If the frog reaches the goal lane then the frog wins.

Example spec

There are 5 lanes of cars and 3 lanes of logs.
Cars move by 1 cell each tick.
Logs move by 1 cell each tick.
If the frog collides with a car then the frog dies.

5) Defender / Stargate CNL

Vocabulary

ship, humanoid, lander, bomber, pod, baiter
scroll, radar, abduct, rescue
x-position, y-position, velocity

Grammar

The world scrolls horizontally at speed <float>.
The ship moves freely in both axes.
A lander attempts to abduct a humanoid.
If a lander reaches a humanoid then the lander abducts the humanoid.
If the ship destroys the lander then the humanoid falls.
If the ship catches the falling humanoid then the humanoid is rescued.

Example spec

The world scrolls at speed 1.
Landers attempt to abduct humanoids.
If a lander reaches a humanoid then the lander abducts the humanoid.
If the ship catches a falling humanoid then the humanoid is rescued.

6) Pac‑Man CNL

Vocabulary

pacman, ghost, pellet, power pellet, maze, tunnel
scatter, chase, frightened
move, eat, collide

Grammar

Pacman moves by 1 cell each tick.
Ghosts follow one of four modes: scatter, chase, frightened, or eaten.
If Pacman eats a pellet then the pellet is removed.
If Pacman eats a power pellet then all ghosts enter frightened mode.
If Pacman collides with a ghost in frightened mode then the ghost is eaten.
If Pacman collides with a ghost in chase mode then Pacman dies.

Example spec

Pacman moves by 1 cell each tick.
Ghosts alternate between scatter and chase modes.
If Pacman eats a power pellet then ghosts enter frightened mode for 6 seconds.

🧱 Why this works so well

Each CNL:

  • captures the core mechanics of its game
  • is small enough for an LLM to follow reliably
  • is clear enough for humans to write
  • maps cleanly to structured state
  • prevents the LLM from drifting into unrelated concepts

You can even build a meta‑CNL that selects which game CNL is active.


The design you've presented for creating multiple Controlled Natural Languages (CNLs) tailored to specific classic arcade games is an excellent idea. It effectively narrows down the scope for each game and gives both human developers and the LLM clear rules and constraints to follow. However, there are a few areas that could be further refined or adjusted to make the implementation smoother and more robust. Let’s walk through some critical reviews and suggested improvements:


1. Vocabulary Choices

While the vocabulary for each game is mostly well-chosen, there are a few areas where further clarification or expansion could help. Specifically:

Space Invaders CNL:

  • “formation”: This term could be made more specific. For example, you could use “enemy formation” or “enemy grid” to clarify that it refers to how enemies are organized.

  • "shield": This may need further specification, such as whether it's a single shield or multiple, where it's located, and how it behaves (e.g., durability, regeneration).

Asteroids CNL:

  • "velocity" and "angle": These are key terms, but it might be useful to add "rotation" and "thrust" as explicit actions, as the player might be rotating and thrusting the ship in various ways. You could clarify how these two actions are treated (e.g., is there a limit to the angle or speed?).

Missile Command CNL:

  • “arc”: While it’s great that you included this term, it could benefit from further definition. Does "arc" mean a parabolic trajectory, or is it customizable? Making it clear whether the arc is affected by gravity or wind (or if it's just a simple path) would be helpful.

Frogger CNL:

  • "log": In the spec, it mentions logs, but it would help to clarify if logs have any specific properties (e.g., size, speed variation, interaction with obstacles). Logs could be a moving platform for the frog, and any changes in speed could be added here.

Defender/Stargate CNL:

  • “velocity” and "scroll": These need to be expanded with more precise definitions. For example, does scrolling refer to a fixed speed, or is it dynamic (e.g., tied to player actions)? You may also want to clarify the ship’s movement (does it have inertia, or is it a fixed speed?).

  • "baiter": The term baiter is quite niche. You may want to define it more clearly (e.g., does the baiter attract enemies, or is it a decoy?)

Pac-Man CNL:

  • "frightened mode": It might be helpful to specify the duration of frightened mode and if there’s any variability in behavior when a ghost is in this mode (e.g., does the ghost move randomly?).

  • "tunnel": Is this a single tunnel or multiple? Clarifying how tunnels work (e.g., they wrap Pac-Man between opposite sides of the maze) could prevent confusion.


2. Grammar Rules

The grammar you’ve outlined is good for defining the basic behaviors of each game, but it might be enhanced by:

Introducing More Complex Sentence Patterns:

For example, some games might have conditionals, loops, or nested logic that need to be expressed in the grammar. This would allow the CNLs to support more intricate game mechanics like power-ups, enemy behaviors, or even dynamic world changes.

Example Refinement:

For Missile Command:

A missile follows a straight-line trajectory toward a city. 
An interceptor is launched from a silo when commanded.
If a missile enters an explosion radius, it is destroyed.
If an interceptor misses the missile, the missile reaches the city and destroys it.

It could be helpful to show the full "missed intercept" behavior clearly so that the game engine knows exactly how to handle different states, not just direct hits.

For Pac-Man:

If Pac-Man eats a power pellet, all ghosts turn into frightened mode for 6 seconds.
If Pac-Man collides with a ghost while in frightened mode, the ghost is eaten.

The duration of power pellets could be handled better if specified explicitly in the grammar (e.g., a time limit).


3. Clarifying Actions and Interactions

Some actions and interactions might benefit from further clarification or specific rules. Let’s go deeper into behavioral aspects.

Space Invaders:

  • Enemy Movement: You specify “enemies move horizontally,” but what happens when they hit the boundary? Adding behaviors like “if all enemies reach the boundary, they all descend and move the other direction” could prevent ambiguity in their behavior.

Asteroids:

  • Splitting Asteroids: It’s mentioned that asteroids split into fragments, but should each fragment continue to behave like the parent asteroid, or do they have distinct behaviors (e.g., smaller asteroids moving faster)? Defining this would ensure the LLM correctly interprets this interaction.

Frogger:

  • Interaction with River and Cars: The CNL mentions the frog “rides the log,” but what happens if the frog misses the log or “falls off”? What happens when the frog is not on a log or in the river?

Pac-Man:

  • Ghost AI: You’ve defined ghost behavior (chase, scatter, frightened, etc.), but specifying how the ghosts transition between these states (e.g., “scatter for 7 seconds, then chase for 5 seconds”) could help make the LLM more grounded and avoid erratic behavior.


4. Domain-Specific Ontology and State Representation

Each game needs to have a clear mapping from CNL to the structured state of the game. Currently, the vocabulary and grammar are well-defined, but specific details of the state representation could be fleshed out more.

For example, consider the Frogger CNL:

{
  "frog": { "position": { "lane": 5, "column": 3 }, "alive": true },
  "cars": [
    { "position": { "lane": 3, "column": 4 }, "direction": "right", "speed": 1 },
    { "position": { "lane": 4, "column": 2 }, "direction": "left", "speed": 1 }
  ],
  "logs": [
    { "position": { "lane": 2, "column": 1 }, "speed": 1 },
    { "position": { "lane": 3, "column": 6 }, "speed": 1 }
  ],
  "goal": { "lane": 0, "column": 5 }
}

By mapping each game entity to specific state attributes (e.g., frog position, car movement, log speed), the LLM can more easily follow the actions and rules of the game.


5. Example of Validation and Error Handling

You mentioned the importance of a validator to reject invalid sentences. Here’s a suggestion on how to do that:

Creating a Structured Schema for the Game State

Create a schema that describes the valid states for each game. For instance, in Missile Command, the missile’s position, trajectory, and target should be described using vectors and radii. Having this schema would help detect when an invalid rule violates the game logic.


6. Handling Complexity: Adding Extensibility

You’ve taken a modular approach by designing small, tight CNLs, but as the game mechanics evolve, you may encounter edge cases that need new mechanics. Some suggestions for this:

  1. Adding New Game Mechanics:

    • Introduce the possibility of extending the CNL with new entities or behaviors as optional extensions (e.g., power-ups, new types of enemies, or dynamic maps).

  2. Hybrid CNL Approach:

    • If needed, create a meta-CNL that provides basic building blocks across all games, with specific game-specific extensions. This could allow you to expand on shared mechanics (e.g., movement, collisions) while maintaining separate rules for each game’s uniqueness.


Final Thoughts and Suggestions for Fixes

  • Clarify Ambiguous Behaviors: In some cases, behaviors (e.g., power-ups, asteroid splitting) could benefit from more precise definitions and conditions (e.g., timing for power-up effects, speed adjustments for smaller fragments of asteroids).

  • Action and Interaction Depth: Make sure actions (e.g., “hop,” “fire,” “move”) and interactions (e.g., “collide,” “destroy”) have clear triggers and consequences, especially for edge cases (e.g., colliding with multiple objects at once, missing a log in Frogger).

  • State Representation: Ensure a clear and structured mapping of CNL rules to game state objects. This will help both LLMs and human developers have a consistent reference point for defining game logic.

  • Error Validation: Create a formal validation system for parsing and detecting invalid rules, ideally with specific error messages to guide the developer.

These improvements would help ensure that the CNLs are robust enough for both human creativity and machine processing, providing a stable foundation for the LLM-driven game engine.


controlled natural video game languages

 license: public domain CC0.


Designing a Controlled Natural Language (CNL) tailored specifically for defining games offers incredible advantages. As you pointed out, it gives us the ability to keep the LLM grounded, provides clarity for human developers, and ensures that we maintain a stable contract between game logic and the LLM engine.

Let's break it down into a concrete plan that incorporates all the elements you outlined — from vocabulary design to grammar rules, to the game loop using the CNL. I’ll also provide a parser design and how this CNL could work seamlessly in the architecture.


Controlled Natural Language (CNL) for Arcade-Style Games

1. Overview

The goal is to create a controlled language for defining arcade-style games like Space Invaders, so that:

  • Human developers can write clear, readable game specs.

  • The LLM engine interprets these rules unambiguously and reliably.

  • The CNL prevents unexpected or illogical behavior from the LLM by providing a well-defined vocabulary and grammar.

2. Key Design Principles for the CNL

  • Human Readability: The CNL should be simple and intuitive, while still being formal enough to avoid ambiguity.

  • Machine Parsability: The language needs to be easily parsed by the system to convert it into structured game logic.

  • LLM Friendliness: The CNL needs to be easy for the LLM to learn, adhere to, and output within the defined constraints.

Major Components of the CNL

  1. Entities: Defines the objects in the game (e.g., player, enemies, bullets).

  2. Behavior: Describes how entities move, interact, and change over time.

  3. Rules: Specifies constraints, such as boundaries, health, and win conditions.

  4. Variations: Allows for additional rules that add complexity or randomness (e.g., different types of enemies or power-ups).


3. CNL Vocabulary

Entity Vocabulary

  • Player: Defines the main character (e.g., ship).

  • Enemy: Describes the enemies, their type, and behaviors.

  • Bullet: Describes the projectiles fired by the player.

  • Power-up: Any temporary bonuses or effects (if applicable).

Example Entity Definitions:

There is a player ship at row 1 column 5.
There are 10 basic enemies in row 10.
A bullet is an object that moves upward.

Action Vocabulary

  • Move: Describes movement in various directions.

  • Fire: Describes shooting actions (usually by the player).

  • Destroy: Describes the destruction of an entity (e.g., when a bullet hits an enemy).

Example Action Definitions:

Each enemy moves horizontally by 1 cell every tick.
The player ship moves left or right by 1 cell when commanded.
The player ship fires a bullet when the action FIRE occurs.

Interaction Vocabulary

  • Collision: Describes interactions between entities, such as bullets hitting enemies.

  • Boundary: Describes the edges of the game grid.

Example Collision Rules:

If a bullet occupies the same cell as an enemy, then the enemy is destroyed.
If an enemy reaches row 1, then the game ends.

Variation Vocabulary

  • Speed: Describes movement speed.

  • Pattern: Describes movement patterns (e.g., zig-zag).

  • Types: Different classes of enemies, each with their own behavior.

Example Variations:

A fast enemy moves horizontally by 2 cells each tick.
A shield blocks bullets until it has taken 3 hits.

4. Grammar Rules

The grammar of the CNL will dictate the structure and flow of valid statements. Below are basic sentence patterns for defining game rules.

Entity Declarations

  • There is a [entity] at [position].

  • There are [number] [entity] in [position].

  • [Entity] is an object that [behavior].

Action Rules

  • [Entity] [action] when [condition].

  • Each [entity] [action] [frequency].

Collision and Interaction Rules

  • If [condition] then [outcome].

  • When [entity] reaches [boundary], [action].

Example Rules Syntax

There is a player ship at row 1 column 5.
Each enemy moves horizontally by 1 cell every tick.
If a bullet occupies the same cell as an enemy then the enemy is destroyed.

The grammar is designed to be as readable as possible while keeping a consistent, logical structure.


5. System Prompt for the LLM

The system prompt ensures that the LLM adheres to the vocabulary and grammar of the CNL. It also specifies that the LLM must follow the rules strictly, which prevents it from deviating into creative or nonsensical outputs.

System Prompt Example

You are a game engine that interprets a controlled natural language (CNL) specification for a 2D arcade shooter game. You must use the vocabulary and sentence structures specified below. Your task is to update the game state based on the actions taken, following the rules provided. If you encounter a concept not covered by the vocabulary, you must ask for clarification. Your output must be structured as JSON, representing the next state of the game.

The system prompt also includes a glossary of terms and sentence templates that the LLM can use.

Glossary Example (for the LLM)

Entities: player ship, enemy, bullet, power-up
Actions: move, fire, destroy, spawn
Conditions: occupies, reaches, moves, takes hits
Outcomes: destroyed, removed, ends game

6. Parser for the CNL

The CNL Parser converts human-written CNL game rules into a machine-readable format, such as JSON or a domain-specific language (DSL). The parser also validates the input to ensure that it adheres to the CNL syntax and grammar.

Steps for the Parser:

  1. Lexical Analysis: Breaks down the CNL text into tokens (keywords, actions, entities, etc.).

  2. Syntax Checking: Ensures the sentence structure follows the grammar rules.

  3. Rule Extraction: Converts the CNL sentence into structured game logic (e.g., a set of JSON rules).

Example Parsed Output:

{
  "entities": [
    { "type": "player", "position": { "row": 1, "column": 5 } },
    { "type": "enemy", "count": 10, "position": { "row": 10 } }
  ],
  "rules": [
    { "action": "move", "subject": "enemy", "direction": "horizontal", "speed": 1 },
    { "action": "fire", "subject": "player" },
    { "condition": "bullet occupies enemy", "effect": "enemy destroyed" }
  ]
}

This structured representation will be used by the LLM engine to update the game state.


7. Example: Space Invaders Defined in CNL

Game Specification (CNL)

The grid has 15 rows and 10 columns.

There is one player ship at row 1 column 5.
The player ship moves left or right by 1 cell when commanded.
The player ship fires a bullet when the action FIRE occurs.

A bullet moves upward by 1 cell each tick.
If a bullet reaches row 15, the bullet is removed.

There are 20 basic enemies in rows 10 to 12.
Each basic enemy moves horizontally by 1 cell every tick.
If any basic enemy reaches a boundary, then all basic enemies move down by 1 cell.

If a bullet occupies the same cell as a basic enemy, then the basic enemy is destroyed.
If any basic enemy reaches row 1, then the game ends.

Parsed Output (JSON):

{
  "grid": { "rows": 15, "columns": 10 },
  "entities": [
    { "type": "player", "position": { "row": 1, "column": 5 }, "actions": ["move left", "move right", "fire"] },
    { "type": "enemy", "count": 20, "position": { "row": 10 }, "movement": { "direction": "horizontal", "speed": 1 } },
    { "type": "bullet", "movement": { "direction": "upward", "speed": 1 }, "remove_condition": "reaches row 15" }
  ],
  "rules": [
    { "condition": "bullet occupies enemy", "effect": "enemy destroyed" },
    { "condition": "enemy reaches row 1", "effect": "game ends" }
  ]
}

8. Next Steps / Ideas

1. Grammar Refinement

  • Fine-tune the grammar to cover more complex actions, interactions, and game dynamics.

  • Consider expanding the CNL to include things like power-ups, complex AI behaviors, or player health.

2. Dynamic Rule Generation

  • Allow for dynamic generation of rules, enabling the game to change over time (e.g., evolving enemy behavior, power-ups that modify rules).

3. Game State Visualization

  • Use the structured output from the CNL parser to automatically generate visualizations of the game state (e.g., a grid representing the positions of the player, enemies, and bullets).

**4.

Enhanced LLM Training**

  • Train or fine-tune the LLM on a larger corpus of game rules to improve its ability to interpret the CNL.


9. Conclusion

Using a Controlled Natural Language (CNL) for defining video games in this way provides an elegant, precise way to control LLM behavior while enabling human-readable game design. This CNL approach balances creativity and structure, ensuring the game logic stays grounded while still allowing for unique, emergent gameplay experiences.

rube goldberg game engine

license: public domain CC0.



AI-Driven Game Design Document

1. High-Level Overview

The goal of this project is to create a weird, AI-driven game using a small LLM as the core game engine, paired with AI-generated visual rendering and frame interpolation for smoother gameplay. The game operates at a simulation frame rate of ~10 FPS, while the visual output runs at 20–30 FPS using frame interpolation techniques.


2. Core Game Loop Architecture

2.1 Components

  1. Game State Manager: Manages the simulation state of the game world.

  2. LLM Game Engine: A small language model that updates the game state based on input and current state.

  3. Renderer: Translates the game state into visual output (state→sprite for speed, text→image for creativity).

  4. Frame Interpolator: Smoothes the visual output by generating intermediate frames.

  5. Input Handler: Handles player input and aggregates actions for each simulation tick.

2.2 End-to-End Game Loop

  1. Input Polling (e.g., 30–60 Hz): Get player input (e.g., MOVE_LEFT, FIRE).

  2. Engine Update:

    • Call the LLM engine with the current state and player input.

    • Get the next state and optional description from the model.

  3. State Update:

    • Update the simulation state with the next state provided by the LLM engine.

  4. Rendering:

    • Render the current state to the screen (using sprite-based rendering for speed).

  5. Interpolation:

    • Use a frame interpolation model to generate intermediate frames between simulation ticks.

  6. Display:

    • Display the interpolated frames at 20–30 FPS.


3. Core Components: Detailed Breakdown

3.1 Game State Representation

The game state is kept minimal to ensure fast updates and ease of processing by the small LLM. It is serialized in a compact, JSON-like format.

{
  "tick": 123,
  "player": { "x": 4, "y": 1, "hp": 1 },
  "enemies": [
    { "x": 1, "y": 10, "type": "basic" },
    { "x": 2, "y": 10, "type": "basic" }
  ],
  "bullets": [
    { "x": 4, "y": 2, "owner": "player" }
  ],
  "effects": [],
  "rng_seed": 987654
}
  • Tick: Current frame or game tick.

  • Player: Coordinates and health of the player.

  • Enemies: List of enemy positions and types.

  • Bullets: Bullets in the game world.

  • Effects: Temporary effects (e.g., explosions, power-ups).

  • rng_seed: Random seed for deterministic behavior.

3.2 LLM Game Engine

3.2.1 Model Choice

  • Size: ~1B–3B parameters.

  • Type: Small instruction-tuned LLM (fine-tuned on state→next-state transitions in grid-based games).

  • Deployment: Quantized (4–8 bit) to optimize for GPU inference.

3.2.2 Prompt Format

System Prompt (Fixed):

You are a game engine for a 2D arcade shooter.
Input: JSON state + player action.
Output: JSON next state with the same schema.
Do not explain. Only output valid JSON.

Per-Frame Prompt:

STATE:
{
  "tick": 123,
  "player": { "x": 4, "y": 1, "hp": 1 },
  "enemies": [{ "x": 1, "y": 10, "type": "basic" }],
  "bullets": [{ "x": 4, "y": 2, "owner": "player" }],
  "effects": [],
  "rng_seed": 987654
}

ACTION:
"FIRE"

NEXT_STATE:

Example Output:

{
  "tick": 124,
  "player": { "x": 4, "y": 1, "hp": 1 },
  "enemies": [{ "x": 1, "y": 9, "type": "basic" }],
  "bullets": [{ "x": 4, "y": 3, "owner": "player" }],
  "effects": [],
  "rng_seed": 987654
}

Optional Description:

DESCRIPTION:
"The player fires upward. The enemy drifts closer."

3.3 Rendering

For proof of concept, we will use state-to-sprite rendering to ensure speed and stability.

3.3.1 State-to-Sprite Pipeline

  1. Directly translate the structured game state into 2D sprites (player, enemies, bullets).

  2. Apply a simple style filter (e.g., neural style transfer) every N frames for visual flair.

3.3.2 Text-to-Image (Optional for Later Phases)

  • Input: A short description generated by the LLM engine.

  • Output: Low-res, AI-generated image based on the description.

3.4 Frame Interpolation

  • Simulation FPS: ~10 FPS (from LLM engine).

  • Display FPS: 20–30 FPS.

  • Use a frame interpolation model (e.g., RIFE, FILM, or NVIDIA DLSS) to generate intermediate frames for smooth display.

3.5 Input Handling

  • Input is polled at display rate (e.g., 30–60 Hz).

  • Aggregate input into a single action for each simulation tick, which is then fed into the LLM engine.


4. Proof of Concept Implementation

4.1 Initial Setup

  1. Game Engine: Implement the LLM-based engine as a small, quantized model running inference at ~10 FPS.

  2. Renderer: Create a simple sprite-based renderer using a 2D canvas.

  3. Frame Interpolation: Implement a basic frame interpolation model (RIFE or FILM) for smoothing the visual output.

  4. Input Handler: Handle input through key presses (MOVE_LEFT, FIRE, etc.) and translate it into actions.

4.2 Example Code Skeleton

import json
import random

# Initial game state
state = {
    "tick": 0,
    "player": { "x": 5, "y": 5, "hp": 3 },
    "enemies": [{ "x": 1, "y": 1, "type": "basic" }],
    "bullets": [],
    "effects": [],
    "rng_seed": 123456
}

# Simulate an LLM response (mocking for the proof of concept)
def llm_engine(state, action):
    next_state = state.copy()
    if action == "FIRE":
        next_state["bullets"].append({"x": state["player"]["x"], "y": state["player"]["y"] + 1, "owner": "player"})
    next_state["tick"] += 1
    return next_state

# Simple render function (mocking)
def render(state):
    print(f"Player at {state['player']['x']}, {state['player']['y']} | Bullets: {len(state['bullets'])}")

# Frame interpolation (mocked, would use an actual model here)
def interpolate_frames(previous_frame, current_frame):
    return [previous_frame, current_frame]  # Return both frames for now

# Main game loop (mocked)
def game_loop():
    global state
    while state["player"]["hp"] > 0:
        action = random.choice(["FIRE", "MOVE_LEFT", "MOVE_RIGHT", "NONE"])
        next_state = llm_engine(state, action)
        render(next_state)
        state = next_state
        # Interpolate and display frames (mocked)
        interpolate_frames(state, state)

if __name__ == "__main__":
    game_loop()

4.3 Next Steps / Ideas

4.3.1 Game Expansion

  • Rules Evolution: Add the ability for the game to evolve over time. For example, the LLM engine could dynamically alter enemy behavior or power-ups, which would create interesting "weirdness" as the game progresses.

  • Procedural Generation: Use the LLM engine to procedurally generate new levels, enemies, and obstacles.

4.3.2 Text-to-Image Rendering

  • Integrate Text-to-Image: Replace or supplement sprite-based rendering with text-to-image models for more surreal, dynamic visuals.

  • Style Variability: Implement an option to change the art style using neural filters or style transfer, adding creativity and weirdness to the visuals.

4.3.3 Hybrid Architecture for Game Design

  • Large Model for Creative Design: Use a larger LLM (not in the real-time loop) to create unique game mechanics, mechanics, and transition data.


Small Model for Real-time Processing: Fine-tune a smaller model to operate in real-time, based on the data generated by the larger model.

4.3.4 Multiplayer or Co-op Features

  • Expand the game loop to support multiple players, each with their own actions, states, and interactions.

  • Explore LLMs generating interactions between players in real-time.


5. Conclusion

This design outlines the integration of a small LLM as the core game engine, providing a proof of concept with a basic game loop using state-to-sprite rendering and frame interpolation. The modular nature of the system allows for easy experimentation, such as switching to text-to-image rendering, adding complex rules, and incorporating hybrid architectures. The game’s unique, AI-driven approach offers potential for endless "weirdness" and emergent gameplay.

linux dual gpu dual monitors

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jS_DuHLMtI-DS1r_uXAt8HqzrZjNm0jx/edit?usp=drivesdk&ouid=106862052260871379871&rtpof=true&sd=true

Dual NVIDIA GPU Configuration Guide

RandR Multi-Monitor Setup with Different Display Specifications

Overview

This guide provides complete instructions for configuring dual discrete NVIDIA GPUs on X.org, where each GPU independently drives a display with different resolutions, refresh rates, or physical specifications. This configuration uses the modern RandR (Resize and Rotate) extension rather than legacy technologies like BaseMosaic or Xinerama.

Use Case

This configuration is appropriate when:

  • You have two discrete NVIDIA GPUs installed
  • Each GPU is connected to one physical display
  • Displays have different resolutions or refresh rates
  • You need mouse movement and window dragging between displays
  • Neither GPU is used for GPGPU or compute workloads

This setup provides a unified desktop experience where each monitor runs at its native resolution and the mouse can move freely between displays.

System Requirements




Hardware Setup Checklist

  • Both NVIDIA GPUs properly seated in PCIe slots
  • Each GPU connected to exactly one display via HDMI/DP/DVI
  • Power connectors attached to both GPUs
  • BIOS/UEFI settings configured (see below)

BIOS/UEFI Configuration

  • Secure Boot: Disabled (or MOK keys enrolled for NVIDIA driver)
  • Above 4G Decoding: Enabled (if available)
  • Primary Display Adapter: Set to PCIe
  • Integrated Graphics: Disabled (if present)


NVIDIA Driver Installation

Remove Existing Drivers

Remove any existing NVIDIA drivers and the nouveau driver:

# For Debian/Ubuntu

sudo apt remove --purge '*nvidia*'


# For Fedora/RHEL

sudo dnf remove '*nvidia*'


# For Arch

sudo pacman -R nvidia nvidia-utils


Blacklist Nouveau Driver

Create a blacklist configuration file:

echo "blacklist nouveau" | sudo tee /etc/modprobe.d/blacklist-nouveau.conf

echo "options nouveau modeset=0" | sudo tee -a /etc/modprobe.d/blacklist-nouveau.conf


Update initramfs:

# Debian/Ubuntu

sudo update-initramfs -u


# Fedora/RHEL/Arch

sudo dracut --force


Install NVIDIA 580 Proprietary Driver

Method 1: Distribution Repository (Recommended)

# Debian/Ubuntu

sudo apt update

sudo apt install nvidia-driver-580 nvidia-settings


# Fedora (RPM Fusion)

sudo dnf install akmod-nvidia xorg-x11-drv-nvidia-cuda


Method 2: NVIDIA .run Installer

# Download from nvidia.com

chmod +x NVIDIA-Linux-x86_64-580.xx.xx.run

sudo ./NVIDIA-Linux-x86_64-580.xx.xx.run


  • Reboot the system after driver installation


Verify Driver Installation

After rebooting, verify the driver loaded successfully:

# Check kernel modules

lsmod | grep nvidia


# Verify both GPUs detected

nvidia-smi


Expected output: nvidia-smi should show two GPUs with their model names and driver version 580.xx.


X.org Configuration

Identify GPU PCI Bus IDs

Find the PCI bus ID for each GPU:

lspci | grep -i 'vga\|3d\|display'


Example output:

01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: NVIDIA Corporation ...

02:00.0 VGA compatible controller: NVIDIA Corporation ...


Convert to X.org format: 01:00.0 becomes PCI:1:0:0 (remove leading zeros from bus number).

Create /etc/X11/xorg.conf

Backup any existing configuration:

sudo cp /etc/X11/xorg.conf /etc/X11/xorg.conf.backup 2>/dev/null || true


Create the configuration file with the following content:

sudo nano /etc/X11/xorg.conf


Complete xorg.conf Configuration

Replace the PCI:1:0:0 and PCI:2:0:0 values with your actual bus IDs:

Section "ServerLayout"

    Identifier     "Layout0"

    Screen      0  "Screen0" 0 0

    Option         "Xinerama" "0"

EndSection


Section "Device"

    Identifier     "Device0"

    Driver         "nvidia"

    VendorName     "NVIDIA Corporation"

    BusID          "PCI:1:0:0"    # Replace with your first GPU

    Screen          0

EndSection


Section "Device"

    Identifier     "Device1"

    Driver         "nvidia"

    VendorName     "NVIDIA Corporation"

    BusID          "PCI:2:0:0"    # Replace with your second GPU

    Screen          0

EndSection


Section "Monitor"

    Identifier     "Monitor0"

EndSection


Section "Monitor"

    Identifier     "Monitor1"

EndSection


Section "Screen"

    Identifier     "Screen0"

    Device         "Device0"

    Device         "Device1"

    Monitor        "Monitor0"

    Monitor        "Monitor1"

    DefaultDepth    24

    Option         "AllowEmptyInitialConfiguration" "True"

    Option         "UseDisplayDevice" "none"

    SubSection     "Display"

        Depth       24

    EndSubSection

EndSection


Configuration Notes

  • AllowEmptyInitialConfiguration: Allows X to start without predetermined resolution
  • UseDisplayDevice "none": Disables static configuration, enabling RandR control
  • Xinerama "0": Disabled (incompatible with modern compositing and RandR)
  • One Screen section with two Device entries: Unified desktop across both GPUs



Display Configuration with RandR

Test X.org Configuration

Before restarting the display manager, test the configuration:

sudo X -config /etc/X11/xorg.conf -retro


Press Ctrl+Alt+Backspace to exit. Check for errors:

grep EE /var/log/Xorg.0.log


Restart Display Manager

# GDM (GNOME)

sudo systemctl restart gdm


# SDDM (KDE)

sudo systemctl restart sddm


# LightDM (XFCE/others)

sudo systemctl restart lightdm


Configure Displays with xrandr

After logging in, list available displays:

xrandr


Example output:

Screen 0: minimum 8 x 8, current 4480 x 1440, maximum 16384 x 16384

DP-0 connected primary 2560x1440+0+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis)

   2560x1440    144.00*+  59.95

DP-2 connected 1920x1080+2560+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis)

   1920x1080     60.00*+


Set Display Layout and Resolutions

Configure each display with its native resolution and position:

# Set first display (left monitor)

xrandr --output DP-0 --mode 2560x1440 --rate 144 --primary --pos 0x0


# Set second display (right monitor)

xrandr --output DP-2 --mode 1920x1080 --rate 60 --right-of DP-0


Alternative: Configure both in one command:

xrandr --output DP-0 --mode 2560x1440 --rate 144 --primary --pos 0x0 \

       --output DP-2 --mode 1920x1080 --rate 60 --pos 2560x0


Position Options




Making Display Settings Permanent

Display configuration needs to be applied on every login. Choose one method:

Method 1: Desktop Environment Settings (Recommended)

Use your desktop environment's display configuration tool:

  • GNOME: Settings → Displays → Arrange displays and click Apply
  • KDE Plasma: System Settings → Display Configuration
  • XFCE: Settings → Display


These tools save settings to ~/.config/monitors.xml or similar configuration files.

Method 2: Autostart Script

Create an xrandr script to run on login:

nano ~/.xprofile


Add the following content (adjust for your displays):

#!/bin/bash

xrandr --output DP-0 --mode 2560x1440 --rate 144 --primary --pos 0x0 \

       --output DP-2 --mode 1920x1080 --rate 60 --pos 2560x0


Make it executable:

chmod +x ~/.xprofile


Method 3: Static X.org Configuration (Not Recommended)

You can add static resolution settings to xorg.conf, but this is less flexible and harder to modify. The RandR approach (Method 1 or 2) is preferred.


Verification and Testing

Verification Checklist

  • Both displays are active and showing content
  • Each display running at its native resolution
  • Mouse pointer moves freely between displays
  • Windows can be dragged between displays
  • Each GPU driving its assigned display (verify in nvidia-smi)


Verification Commands

Check GPU status and driver version:

nvidia-smi


Verify display configuration:

xrandr --listproviders

xrandr --verbose


Check screen count (should be 1):

xdpyinfo | grep "number of screens"


Test OpenGL rendering on each display:

glxinfo | grep 'OpenGL renderer'

glxgears  # Move window between displays



Troubleshooting

X Server Fails to Start

  • Check X.org logs: grep EE /var/log/Xorg.0.log
  • Verify BusID matches lspci output (remove leading zeros)
  • Test configuration: sudo X -config /etc/X11/xorg.conf -retro
  • Check kernel module loading: dmesg | grep nvidia


One Display Not Working

  • Verify cable connections and monitor power
  • Check display detection: xrandr
  • Try swapping displays between GPUs to isolate hardware issue
  • Verify both GPUs visible: nvidia-smi


Mouse Cannot Move Between Displays

  • Verify Xinerama is disabled: grep Xinerama /etc/X11/xorg.conf
  • Check screen count: xdpyinfo | grep screens (should be 1)
  • Verify unified desktop: xrandr (should show relative positions)


Displays Running at Wrong Resolution

  • List available modes: xrandr
  • Manually set resolution: xrandr --output DP-0 --mode 2560x1440
  • Save settings in desktop environment or .xprofile


Screen Tearing

Enable ForceCompositionPipeline for each display:

nvidia-settings --assign CurrentMetaMode="DP-0: nvidia-auto-select +0+0 {ForceCompositionPipeline=On}, DP-2: nvidia-auto-select +2560+0 {ForceCompositionPipeline=On}"


Or add to xorg.conf Device section:

Option "metamodes" "DP-0: nvidia-auto-select +0+0 {ForceCompositionPipeline=On}, DP-2: nvidia-auto-select +2560+0 {ForceCompositionPipeline=On}"


Display Configuration Not Persistent

  • Verify .xprofile is being executed: add echo statement
  • Check desktop environment display settings are saved
  • Ensure xrandr commands complete without errors



Optional Optimizations

Power Management

Set adaptive power mode:

nvidia-settings -a GPUPowerMizerMode=1


Add to .xprofile to make permanent.


Per-Monitor DPI Scaling

For displays with different pixel densities:

xrandr --output DP-0 --scale 1x1 --dpi 109

xrandr --output DP-2 --scale 1x1 --dpi 92


Note: Perfect per-monitor DPI scaling on X11 is challenging. Wayland handles this better if you're willing to switch display servers.

Disable Unused Features

Add to Device sections in xorg.conf:

Option "AllowGPUCUDA" "0"


Since you're not using GPGPU/compute, this can reduce overhead.


Monitor GPU Temperature

watch -n 1 nvidia-smi



Additional Resources

  • NVIDIA Driver Documentation: https://download.nvidia.com/XFree86/Linux-x86_64/
  • X.org RandR Documentation: https://www.x.org/wiki/Projects/XRandR/
  • Arch Wiki NVIDIA: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/NVIDIA
  • NVIDIA Forums: https://forums.developer.nvidia.com/


Summary

This configuration provides a unified desktop across two NVIDIA GPUs, where:

  • Each GPU independently drives one display
  • Each display runs at its native resolution and refresh rate
  • Mouse and windows move seamlessly between displays
  • Modern RandR provides flexible, dynamic display management
  • No deprecated technologies like Xinerama or BaseMosaic required


This setup is optimal for dual-GPU workstations with heterogeneous displays and provides the best balance of flexibility, performance, and user experience.