To Infinity and Beyond: SHOW-1 and ShowrunnerAgents in Multi-Agent Simulations

Philipp Maas
Fable Studio
Edward Saatchi
Fable StudioFrank Carey
Fable StudioPete Billington
Fable Studio

Chris Wheeler
Fable Studio
Jessica Yaffa Shamash
Fable Studio

Abstract
In this work we present our approach to generating high-quality episodic content for
IP’s (Intellectual Property) using large language models (LLMs), custom state-ofthe art diffusion models and our multi-agent simulation for contextualization, story
progression and behavioral control. Powerful LLMs such as GPT-4 were trained ona large corpus of TV show data which lets us believe that with the right guidance
users will be able to rewrite entire seasons."That Is What Entertainment Will Look
Like. Maybe people are still upset about the last season of Game of Thrones.
Imagine if you could ask your A.I. to make a new ending that goes a different way
and maybe even put yourself in there as a main character or something.”.1

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

1

Brockman https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/digital/chatgpt-game-of-thrones-openai-gregbrockman-1235348099/amp/101Creative limitations of existing generative AI Systems

15

Current generative AI systems such as Stable Diffusion (Image Generator) and ChatGPT (Large
Language Model) excel at short-term general tasks through prompt engineering. However, they do
not provide contextual guidance or intentionality to either a user or an automated generative story
system (showrunner2 ) as part of a long-term creative process which is often essential to producing
high-quality creative works, especially in the context of existing IP’s.

16

1.1

11
12
13
14

Living with uncertainty

Figure 1: Example Still from South Park AI Episode
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35

By using a multi-agent3 simulation as part of the process we can make use of data points such asa character’s history, their goals and emotions, simulation events and localities to generate scenes
and image assets more coherently and consistently aligned with the IP story world. The IP-based
simulation also provides a clear, well known context to the user which allows them to judge thegenerated story more easily. Moreover, by allowing them to exert behavioral control over agents,
observe their actions and engage in interactive conversations, the user’s expectations and intentions
are formed which we then funnel into a simple prompt to kick off the generation process.
Our simulation is sufficiently complex and non-deterministic to favor a positive disconfirmation.
Amplification effects can help mitigate what we consider an undesired "slot machine" effect which
we’ll briefly touch on later. We are used to watching episodes passively and the timespan between
input and "end of scene/episode" discourages immediate judgment by the user and as a result reduces
their desire to "retry". This disproportionality of the user’s minimal input prompt and the resulting
high-quality long-form output in the form of a full episode is a key factor for positive disconfirmation.
While using and prompting a large language model as part of the process can introduce "several
challenges".4 Some of them, like hallucinations, which introduce uncertainty or in more creative
terms "unexpectedness", can be regarded as creative side-effects to influence the expected story
outcome in positive ways. As long as the randomness introduced by hallucination does not lead to
implausible plot or agent behavior and the system can recover, they act as happy-accidents5 , a term
often used during the creative process, further enhancing the user experience.
2

https://fablesimulation.com/blog/friends-ai-sitcom-simulation
Sung Park https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.03442
4
Li https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.17760
5
Maas https://noproscenium.com/from-a-i-character-to-sundance-filmmaker-with-gpt-3-d4ab80c31b4e
3

2

36

1.2

37

The Slot Machine Effect refers to a scenario where the generation of AI-produced content feels more
like a random game of chance rather than a deliberate creative process6 . This is due to the often
unpredictable and instantaneous nature of the generation process.

38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49

The Issue of ‘The Slot Machine Effect’ in current Generative AI tools

Current off-the-shelf generative AI systems do not support or encourage multiple creative evaluation
steps in context of a long-term creative goal. Their interfaces generally feature various settings, suchas sliders and input fields which increase the level control and variability. The final output however,is generated almost instantaneously by the press of a button. This instantaneous generation process
results in immediate gratification providing a dopamine rush to the user. This reward mechanism
would be generally helpful to sustain a multi-step creative process over long periods of time but
current interfaces, the frequency of the reward and a lack of progression (stuck in an infinite loop)
can lead to negative effects such as frustration, the intention-action gap7 or a loss of control over thecreative process. The gap results from behavioral bias favoring immediate gratification, which canbe detrimental to long-term creative goals.

Figure 2: User Interface Comparison - Left to right: Stable Diffusion Gradio, ChatGPT, Runway
Gen-2
50
51
52
53
54

While we do not directly solve these issues through interfaces, the contextualization of the process
in a simulation and the above mentioned disproportionality and timespan between input and output
help mitigate them. In addition we see opportunities in the simulation for in-character discriminatorsthat participate in the creative evaluation process, such as an agent reflecting on the role they wereassigned to or a scene they should perform in.

63

The multi-step "trial and error" process of the generative story system is not presented to the user,
therefore it doesn’t allow for intervention or judgment, avoiding the negative effects of immediate
gratification through a user’s "accept or reject" decisions. It does not matter to the user experience
how often the AI system has to retry different prompt chains8 as long as the generation process is
not negatively perceived as idle time but integrated seamlessly with the simulation gameplay. The
user only acts as the discriminator in the very end of the process after having watched the generated
scene or episode. This is also an opportunity to utilize the concept of Reinforcement Learning
through Human Feedback (RLHF) for improving the multi-step creative process and as a result the
automatically generated episode.

64

1.3

65

LLMs represent the forefront of natural language processing and machine learning research, demonstrating exceptional capabilities in understanding and generating human-like text. They are typically

55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62

66

Large Language Models

6

https://artificial.tech/slot-machine-effect-of-ai/
https://thedecisionlab.com/reference-guide/psychology/intention-action-gap
8
Yang https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.02224
7

3

67
68
69
70

built on Transformer-based architectures, a class of models that rely on self-attention9 mechanisms.
Transformers allow for efficient use of computational resources, enabling the training of significantly
larger language models. GPT-4, for instance, comprises billions of parameters that are trained on
extensive datasets, effectively encoding a substantial quantity of worldly knowledge in their weights.

Figure 3: Diagram of the Transformer Architecture10
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96

Central to the functioning of these LLMs is the concept of vector embeddings. These are mathematicalrepresentations of words or phrases in a high-dimensional space. These embeddings capture thesemantic relationships between words, such that words with similar meanings are located close toeach other in the embedding space. In the case of LLMs, each word in the model’s vocabulary is
initially represented as a dense vector, also known as an embedding. These vectors are adjusted
during the training process, and their final values, or "embeddings", represent the learned relationships
between words. During training, the model learns to predict the next word in a sentence by adjusting
the embeddings and other parameters to minimize the difference between the predicted and actual
words. The embeddings thus reflect the model’s understanding of words and their context. Moreover,because Transformers can attend to any word in a sentence regardless of its position, the model
can form a more comprehensive understanding of the meaning of a sentence. This is a significant
advancement over older models that could only consider words in a limited window. The combinationof vector embeddings and Transformer-based architectures in LLMs facilitates a deep and nuanced
understanding of language, which is why these models can generate such high-quality, human-liketext.
As was mentioned previously, transformer-based language models excel at short-term general tasks.
They are regarded as fast-thinkers. [Kahneman]12 . Fast thinking pertains to instinctive, automatic,
and often heuristic-based decision-making, while slow thinking involves deliberate, analytical, andeffortful processes. LLMs generate responses swiftly based on patterns learned from training data,
without the capacity for introspection or understanding the underlying logic behind their outputs.
However, this also implies that LLMs lack the ability to deliberate, reason deeply, or learn fromsingular experiences13 in the way that slow-thinking entities, such as humans, can. While thesemodels have made remarkable strides in text generation tasks, their fast-thinking nature may limit
their potential in tasks requiring deep comprehension or flexible reasoning. More recent approaches
to imitate slow-thinking capabilities such as prompt-chaining (see Auto-GPT) showed promising
results. Large language models seem powerful enough to act as their own discriminator in a multi-step
9

Vaswani https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.03762
Vaswani https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.03762
11https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/azure-data-explorer-blog/azure-data-explorer-for-vectorsimilarity-search/ba-p/3819626
12
Bubeck https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712
13
Bubeck https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712
104

Figure 4: Example of Text Vector Embedding11

97
98
99
100
101
102

process. This can dramatically improve the ability to reason in different contexts, such as solving
math problems.14
We make heavy use of GPT-4 to influence the agents in the simulation as well as generating thescenes for the south park episode. Since transcriptions of most of the south park episodes are part of
GPT-4’s training dataset, it already has a good understanding of the character’s personalities, talking
style as well as overall humor of the show, eliminating the need for a custom fine-tuned model.

113

However, we do imitate slow-thinking as part of a multi-step creative process. For this we use
different prompt chains to compare and evaluate the events of different scenes and how they progress
the overall story towards a satisfactory, IP-aligned result. Our attempt to generate episodes throughprompt-chaining is due to the fact that story generation is a highly discontinuous task.15 These aretasks where the content generation cannot be done in a gradual or continuous way, but instead
requires a certain ”Eureka” idea that accounts for a discontinuous leap in the progress towards
the solution of the task. The content generation involves discovering or inventing a new way oflooking at or framing the problem, that enables the generation of the rest of the content. Examples
of discontinuous tasks are solving a math problem that requires a novel or creative application of
a formula, writing a joke or a riddle, coming up with a scientific hypothesis or a philosophicalargument, or creating a new genre or style of writing.

114

1.4

115

Diffusion models operate on the principle of gradually adding or removing random noise from dataover time to generate or reconstruct an output. The image starts as random noise and, over many
steps, gradually transforms into a coherent picture, or vice versa.

103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112

116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125

Diffusion Models

In order to train our custom diffusion models, we collected a comprehensive dataset comprising
approximately 1200 characters and 600 background images from the TV show South Park. Thisdataset serves as the raw material from which our models learned the style of the show.
To train these models, we employ Dream Booth.16 The result of this training phase is the creation of
two specialized diffusion models.
The first model is dedicated to generating single characters set against a keyable background color.
This facilitates the extraction of the generated character for subsequent processing and animation,
allowing us to seamlessly integrate newly generated characters into a variety of scenes and settings. h
14

Baker https://openai.com/research/improving-mathematical-reasoning-with-process-supervision
Bubeck https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712
16
Ruiz https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.12242
15

5

Figure 5: Stable Diffusion Model for South Park Backgrounds, prompt: "a residence building inSouth park [demoura artstyle]"

126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136

In addition, the character diffusion model allows the user to create asouth park character based on their own looks via the image-to-image
process of stable diffusion and then join the simulation as an equallyparticipating agent. With the ability to clone their own voice, it’s easy
to imagine a fully realized autonomous character based on the user’s
characteristic looks, writing style and voice.
The second model is trained to generate clean backgrounds, with aparticular focus on both exterior and interior environments. This model
provides the ’stage’ upon which our generated characters can interact, Figure 6: Example of genallowing for a wide range of potential scenes and scenarios to be created. erated South Park character

Figure 7: GPT-4 generated SVG image, prompt: "Can you give me a svg drawing of a house on astreet?"
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144

However, it’s important to note that the images produced by thesemodels are inherently limited in their resolution due to the pixel-based
nature of the output. To circumvent this limitation, we post-process thegenerated images using an AI upscaling technique, specifically R-ESRGAN-4x+-Anime6B, whichrefines and enhances the image quality.
For future 2D interactive work, training custom transformer based models that are capable ofgenerating vector-based output would have several advantages. Unlike pixel-based images, vector
6

145
146
147
148
149

graphics do not lose quality when resized or zoomed, thus offering the potential for infinite resolution.
This will enable us to generate images that retain their quality and detail regardless of the scale atwhich they are viewed. Furthermore, vector based shapes are already separated into individual parts,
solving pixel-based post-processing issues with transparency and segmentation which complicate theintegration of generated assets into procedural world building and animation systems.

Figure 8: SVGs generated by GPT-4 for the classes automobile, truck, cat, dog.17

150

151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159

2

Episode Generation

We define an episode as a sequence of dialogue scenes in specific locations which add up to a total
runtime of a regular 22 min south park episode.
In order to generate a full south park episode, we prompt the story system with a high level idea,
usually in the form of a title, synopsis and major events we want to see happen over the course of 1
week in simulation time (=roughly 3 hours of play time).
From this, the story system automatically extrapolates up to 14 scenes by making use of simulation
data as part of a prompt chain. The showrunner system takes care of casting the characters for eachscene and how the story should progress through a plot pattern. Each scene is associated with a plot
letter (e.g. A, B, C) which is then used by the showrunner to alternate between different charactergroups and follow their individual storylines over the course of an episode to keep the user engaged.

Figure 9: Diagram of Showrunner systems and prompt graph
160
161
162
163
164

In the end, each scene simply defines the location, cast and dialogue for each cast member. The sceneis played back according to the plot pattern (e.g. ABABC) after the staging system and AI camera
system went through initial setup. The voice of each character has been cloned in advance and voice
clips are generated on the fly for every new dialogue line.
17

https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712

7

165

2.1

166

In our experiments, generating a single scene can take a significant amount of time of up to one
minute. Below is a response time comparison between GPT-3.5-turbo and GPT-4. Speed will increasein the short-term as models and service infrastructure get improved and other factors like artificial
throttling due to high user demand will get removed.

167
168
169
170
171
172

Reducing Latency

Since we generate the episodes during gameplay, we have ways to hide most of the generation time in
moments when the user is still interacting with the simulation or other user interfaces. Another way
to reduce the time needed to generate a scene or episode is to use faster models such as GPT-3.5-turbo
for specific prompts in the chain where the highest quality and accuracy is not so important.

Figure 10: Speed comparison of GPT-3.5 vs. GPT-418
173

180

During scene playback, we avoid any unwanted pauses between dialogue lines related to audio
generation by using a simple buffering system which generates at least one voice clip in advance.
See figure 11. This means while one character is delivering their voice clip, we already make the
web request for the next voice clip, wait for it to generate, download the file and then wait for thecurrent speaker to finish his dialogue before playback (delay). In this way the next dialogue line’s
voice clip is always delivered without any delay. Text generation and voice cloning services become
increasingly fast and allow for highly adaptive and near-real time voice conversations.

181

2.2

182

As stated earlier, the data produced by the simulation acts as creative fuel to both, the user who iswriting the initial prompt and the generative story system which is interacting with the LLM via
prompt-chaining. Prompt-chaining19 is a technique, which involves supplying the language model

174
175
176
177
178
179

183
184

18
19

Simulate creative thinking

Pungas https://www.taivo.ai/g pt−3−5−and−gpt−4−response−times/
Wu https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.06566

Figure 11: Diagram of zero-delay voice clip generation
8

185
186
187

with a sequence of related prompts to simulate a continuous thought process. Sometimes it can takeon different roles in each step to act as the discriminator against the previous prompt and generated
result.

Figure 12: Example of a prompt chain from Auto-GPT20

188
189
190
191
192
193
194

In our case we try to mimic that of a discontinuous creative thought process. For example, thecreation of 14 distinct South Park scenes could be managed by initially providing a broad prompt tooutline the general narrative, followed by specific prompts detailing and evaluating each scene’s cast,location, and key plot points. This mimics the process of human brainstorming, where ideas are built
upon and refined in multiple often discontinuous steps. By leveraging the generative capabilities of
LLMs in conjunction with the iterative refinement offered by prompt-chaining, we can effectively
construct a dynamic, detailed, and engaging narrative.

206

In addition, we explore new concepts like plot patterns and dramatic operators (DrOps) to enhancethe episode structure overall but also the connective tissue between each scene. Stylistic devices
like reversals, foreshadowing, cliffhangers are difficult to evaluate as part of a prompt chain. A
user without a writing background would have equal difficulty in judging these stylistic devices fortheir effectiveness and proper placement. We propose a procedural approach, injecting these show
specific patterns and stylistic devices into the prompt chain programmatically as plot patterns andDrOps which can operate on the level of act structures, scene structures and individual dialogue
lines. We are investigating future opportunities to extract what we call a dramatic fingerprint whichis specific to each IP and format and train our custom SHOW-1 model with these data points. Thisdataset combined with overall human feedback could further align tone, style and entertainment value
between the user and the specified IP while offering a highly adaptive and interactive story system aspart of the on-going simulation.

207

2.3

208

As mentioned above, one of the advantages of the simulation is that it avoids the blank page problem
for both a user and a large language model by providing creative fuel22 . Even experienced writers
can sometimes feel overwhelmed when asked to come up with a title or story idea without any priorincubation of related material. The same could be said for LLMs. The simulation provides context
and data points before starting the creative prompt chain.

195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205

209
210
211
212

Blank Page Problem

20
Yank, Auto-GPT for Online Decision Making:
Benchmarks and Additional
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2306.02224.pdf
21
Drhlík, https://pdrhlik.github.io/southparktalk-whyr2018/22https://www.trytriggers.com/blog-posts/overcoming-the-barrier-of-the-blank-page

9

Opinions

Figure 13: Diagram of South Park Episode ratings from IMDB21

Figure 14: Example UI of Showrunner prompt input

213

2.4

214

The story generation process in our approach is a shared responsibility between the simulation,
the user, and GPT-4. Each has strengths and weaknesses and a unique role to play depending on
how much we want to involve them in the overall creative process. Their contributions can havedifferent weights. While the simulation usually provides the foundational IP-based context, character
histories, emotions, events, and localities that seed the initial creative process. The user introduces
their intentionality, exerts behavioral control over the agents and provides the initial prompts that kickoff the generative process. The user also serves as the final discriminator, evaluating the generated
story content at the end of the process. GPT-4, on the other hand, serves as the main generativeengine, creating and extrapolating the scenes and dialogue based on the prompts it receives from boththe user and the simulation. It’s a symbiotic process where the strengths of each participant contributeto a coherent, engaging story. Importantly, our multi-step approach in the form of a prompt-chain
also provides checks and balances, mitigating the potential for unwanted randomness and allowing
for more consistent alignment with the IP story world.

215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226

Who is driving the story

10

227

2.5

228

The formular (creative characteristics) and format (technical characteristics) of a show are often afunction of real-world limitations and production processes. They usually don’t change, even overthe course of many seasons (South Park currently has 26 seasons and 325 episodes).23

229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278

SHOW-1 and Intentionality

A single dramatic fingerprint of a show, which is used to train the proposed SHOW-1 model, can be
regarded as a highly variable template or "formula" for a procedural generator that produces South
Park-like episodes.
To train a model such as SHOW-1 we need to gather a sufficient amount of data points in relation toeach other that characterize a show. A TV show does not just come into existence and is made upof the final dialogue lines and set descriptions as seen by the audience. Existing datasets on whichcurrent LLM’s are trained on only consist of the final screenplay which has the cast, dialogue lines
and sometimes a short scene header. A lot of information is missing, such as timing, emotional
states, themes, contexts discussed in the writer’s room and detailed directorial notes to give a few
examples. The development and refinement of characters is also part of this on-going process.
Fictional characters have personalities, backstories and daily routines which help authors to sculpt
not only scenes but the arcs of whole seasons. Even during a show characters keep evolving basedon audience feedback or changes in creative direction. With the Simulation, we can gather data
continuously from both the user’s input and the simulated agents. Over time, as episodes are created,refined and rated by the user we can start to train a show specific model and deploy it as a checkpoint
which allows the user to continue to refine and iterate on either their own original show or alternatively
push an already existing show such as south park into directions previously not conceived by theoriginal show runners and IP holders. To illustrate this, we imagine a user generating multiple southpark episodes in which Cartman, one of the main characters and known for his hot headedness, slowly
changes to be shy and naive while the life of other characters such as Butters could be tuned to follow
a much more dominant and aggressive path. Over time, this feedback loop of interacting with andfine-tuning the SHOW-1 model can lead to new interpretations of existing shows but more excitingly
to new original shows based on the user’s intention. One of the challenges in order to make thisfeedback loop engaging and satisfying is the frequency at which a model can be trained. A model
which is fed by real-time simulation data and user input should not feel static or require expensive
resources to adapt. Otherwise the output it generates can feel static and unresponsive as well.
When a generative system is not limited in its ability to swiftly produce high amounts of content andthere is no limit for the user to consume such content immediately and potentially simultaneously,
the 10,000 Bowls of Oatmeal24 problem can become an issue. Everything starts to look and feel thesame or even worse, the user starts to recognize a pattern which in turn reduces their engagement asthey expect newly generated episodes to be like the ones before it, without any surprises.
This is quite different from a predictable plot which in combination with the above mentioned"positive hallucinations" or happy accidents of a complex generative system can be a good thing.
Surprising the user by balancing and changing the phases of certainty vs. uncertainty helps increase
their overall engagement. If they would not expect or predict anything, they could also not getpleasantly surprised.
With our work we aim for perceptual uniqueness. The OatMeal problem of procedural generators is
mitigated by making use of an on-going simulation (a hidden generator) and the long-form content of
22 min episodes which are only generated every 3h. This way the user generally does not consume ahigh quantity of content simultaneously or in a very short amount of time. This artificial scarcity,
natural game play limits and simulation time help.
Another factor that keeps audiences engaged while watching a show and what makes episodes unique
is intentionality from the authors. A satirical moral premise, twisted social commentary, recent world
events or cameos by celebrities are major elements for South Park. Other show types, for example
sitcoms, usually progress mainly through changes in relationship (some of which are never fulfilled),
keeping the audience hooked despite following the same format and formula.
Intentionality from the user to generate a high-quality episode is another area of internal research.
Even users without a background in dramatic writing should be able to come up with stories, themes
23
24

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SouthP ark
Compton, Procedural Storytelling in Game Design

11

279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292

or major dramatic questions they want to see played out within the simulation. To support this,the showrunner system could guide the user by sharing its own creative thought process and makeencouraging suggestions or prompting the user by asking the right questions. A sort of reversed
prompt engineering where the user is answering questions.
One of the remaining unanswered questions in the context of intentionality is how much entertainment
value (or overall creative value) is directly attributed to the creative personas of living authors anddirectors. Big names usually drive ticket sales but the creative credit the audience gives to the work
while consuming it seems different. Watching a Disney movie certainly carries with it a sense ofcreative quality, regardless of famous voice actors, as a result of brand attachment and its history.
AI generated content is generally perceived as lower quality and the fact that it can get generated
in abundance further decreases its value. How much this perception would change if Disney wereto openly pride themselves on having produced a fully AI generated movie is hard to say. What if
Steven Spielberg, single handedly generated an AI movie? Our assumption is that the perceived valueof AI generated content would certainly increase.

298

A new interesting approach to replicate this could be the embodiment of creative AI models suchas SHOW-1 to allow them to build a persona outside their simulated world and build relationships
via social media25 or real world events with their audience.26 As long as an AI model is perceived
as a black box and does not share their creative process and reasoning in a human and accessible
way, as is the case for living writers and directors, it’s unlikely to get credit with real creative values.
However, for now this is a more philosophical question in the context of AGI.

299

3

293
294
295
296
297

300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308

Conclusion

Our approach of using multi-agent simulation and large language models for generating high-quality
episodic content provides a novel and effective solution to many of the limitations of current AI
systems in creative storytelling. By integrating the strengths of the simulation, the user, and the
AI model, we provide a rich, interactive, and engaging storytelling experience that is consistentlyaligned with the IP story world. Our method also mitigates issues such as the ’slot machine effect’,’the oatmeal problem’ and ’blank page problem’ that plague conventional generative AI systems.
As we continue to refine this approach, we are confident that we can further enhance the quality of
the generated content, the user experience, and the creative potential of generative AI systems instorytelling.

310

Acknowledgements We are grateful to Lewis Hackett for his help and expertise in training thecustom Stable Diffusion Models.

311

References

309

313

[1] Brockman https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/digital/chatgpt-game-of-thrones-openai-gregbrockman-1235348099/amp/

314[2] Maas https://fablesimulation.com/blog/friends-ai-sitcom-simulation

315[3] Sung Park https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.03442

316[4] Li https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.17760

317[5] Maas https://noproscenium.com/from-a-i-character-to-sundance-filmmaker-with-gpt-3-d4ab80c31b4e

318[6] https://artificial.tech/slot-machine-effect-of-ai/

319[7] https://thedecisionlab.com/reference-guide/psychology/intention-action-gap

320[8] Yang https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.02224

321[9] Vaswani https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.03762

322[10] Vaswani https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.03762

312

25

Virtual Beings https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSq-mheA7Ds, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IROZSq–
MQE
26
Collaborating with AI at Sundance https://www.fable-studio.com/behind-the-scenes/ai-collaboration

12

324

[11] https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/azure-data-explorer-blog/azure-data-explorer-for-vector-similaritysearch/ba-p/3819626

325[12] Bubeck https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712

326[13] Bubeck https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712

327[14] Baker https://openai.com/research/improving-mathematical-reasoning-with-process-supervision328[15] Bubeck https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712

329[16] Ruiz https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.12242

330[17] https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712

323[18] Pungas https://www.taivo.ai/g pt−3−5−and−gpt−4−response−times/
331[19] Wu https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.06566

332
333

[20] Yank, Auto-GPT for Online Decision Making:
Benchmarks and Additional Opinions
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2306.02224.pdf [21] Drhlík, https://pdrhlik.github.io/southparktalk-whyr2018334[22] https://www.trytriggers.com/blog-posts/overcoming-the-barrier-of-the-blank-page[23] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SouthP ark

335[24] Compton, Procedural Storytelling in Game Design

336
337

[25]
VirtualBeingshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IROZSq–MQE

338[26] Collaborating with AI at Sundance https://www.fable-studio.com/behind-the-scenes/ai-collaboration

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSq-mheA7Ds,

13