MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W11707698

Proceedings of the Eighth Eurographics Symposium on Sketch-Based Interfaces and Modeling

2011· article· en· W11707698 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ellen Yi–Luen, Jean-Claude Léon, Tracy Hammond, Andy Nealen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInteractive and Immersive Displays
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSketchPresentation (obstetrics)Computer scienceAnimationRendering (computer graphics)Perspective (graphical)Sketch recognitionComputer graphics (images)Library scienceArtificial intelligenceAlgorithm
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

These proceedings contain the papers presented at the eighth instantiation of the annual academic gathering on Sketch-Based Interfaces and Modeling. SBIM was initiated as a workshop in 2004 to provide a unique venue to discuss novel algorithms, interfaces, perspectives, and uses for sketch-based technologies. Since that time, SBIM has become a popular and respected symposium (in 2009) associated with both ACM SIGRGRAPH and Eurographics, and remains the top venue dedicated to the discussion and presentation of 2D or 3D sketch-based academic work representing recognition, interfaces, and modeling research perspective. SBIM is an international conference that alternates between North American and European locations. Last year, SBIM was located in Annecy, France for the second time, in conjunction with the Annecy Animation Film Festival. This year, SBIM is located in Vancouver, Canada for the first time. Additionally, this is the first year that SBIM is a joint and is co-located with SIGGRAPH and is joint with Computational Aesthetics and Non-Photorealistic Animation and Rendering. We had 36 paper submissions this year, which matches the number we had last year. Each paper was double blind reviewed by at least four members of our international program committee and we were able to accept 18 of them for the symposium. As in previous years, the quality of the submitted papers was strong, resulting in a high acceptance rate, a testament to those researchers who work in this field. The papers in these proceedings present a mix of innovative ideas in sketch recognition, 3D modeling, and sketch-based interface usability.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.683
Threshold uncertainty score0.200

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.195 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInteractive and Immersive DisplaysFrench-language works237,207