MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1605836264

Proceedings of the twenty-eighth annual symposium on Computational geometry

2012· article· en· W1605836264 sur OpenAlexaff
Tamal K. Dey, Sue Whitesides

Notice bibliographique

Revuenon disponible
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineComputer Science
ThématiqueComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Victoria
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPresentation (obstetrics)Computer scienceAnimationProcess (computing)ChapelLibrary scienceGraphicsOperations researchComputer graphics (images)Mathematics
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This volume contains the abstracts of the 44 research papers, 4 video presentations, and 3 invited talks scheduled for presentation at the 28th Annual Symposium on Computational Geometry, to be held at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, June 17-20, 2012. There were 126 paper submissions (with 2 withdrawn) among which the program committee selected 44 papers for presentation at the conference. The selection process mainly consisted of two phases. In the review phase, the program committee produced at least 3 reviews for each submitted paper. In many cases, program committee members called upon external subreviewers for assistance. In the deliberation phase, which lasted from January 17 to February 16, the program committee discussed the submitted papers and their reviews extensively, obtaining additional input from experts in some cases. The on-line submission process and the review and deliberation phases were conducted using the electronic tools provided by EasyChair. We acknowledge that the entire complex process, from paper submission to final notification of decisions, was aided significantly by this system. In addition to the paper submissions, six videos were submitted in response to the Call for Videos and Multimedia. All six were reviewed, and four of these were accepted for presentation. The videos use animation and graphics to communicate the behavior of specific algorithms. These proceedings contain a short, 2-page description for each of the videos accepted. The final videos for all accepted contributions will be archived at http://www.computational-geometry.org. In many cases, the papers in these proceedings do not contain full details of all results claimed, due to the 10-page limit for regular submissions. We hope that most of these papers will later appear with full details in refereed journals. Each of the three invited talks is represented in this volume by a 1-page description of the topic, the speaker, and some background references. We hope that this information will provide the reader with the means to explore further. This year, we are taking the initiative to confer three awards: two Best Paper awards and one Best Student Presentation award. The two Best Papers will be selected from the 44 accepted papers by a sub-committee of the program committee, based on the nominations of the program committee and the merits of the research results. The Best Student Presentation award will be determined at the symposium based on input from the attendees at the talks given by students. Student speakers must be authors or co-authors of the papers they present. We hope that all these awards will be seen as encouraging tokens for the authors. We note that this year, as an experiment, the symposium is being held in the mornings over a 4-day period, along with an afternoon series of geometry related events collectively called CG:APT (Computational Geometry: Applications, Practice, and Theory). CG:APT has its own program committee. The aim of holding the symposium together with CG:APT is to welcome a broader group of participants, including graduate students and those working in areas where mutual interaction with computational geometry could prove fruitful.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,933
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,253

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,010
Tête enseignante GPT0,229
Écart entre enseignants0,219 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations5
Publié2012
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même sujetComputational Geometry and Mesh GenerationTravaux en français237 207