MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1514990091

Proceedings of the 2008 ACM symposium on Solid and physical modeling

2008· article· en· W1514990091 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eric Haines, Morgan McGuire

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLibrary scienceAtlantaSalt lakeBeijingChinaOperations researchComputer scienceEngineeringHistoryArchaeologyGeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Symposium on Solid and Physical Modeling and Applications is an annual international forum for the exchange of recent research results and applications of spatial modeling and computations in design, analysis and manufacturing, as well as in emerging biomedical, geophysical and other areas. Previous symposia in this series were held in Austin, Texas, 1991; Montreal, Canada, 1993; Salt Lake City, Utah, 1995; Atlanta, Georgia, 1997; Ann Arbor, Michigan in 1999 and 2001; Saarbrucken, Germany, 2002; Seattle, Washington, 2003; Genova, Italy, 2004, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2005; Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom, 2006; and Beijing, China, 2007. For additional information, please visit www.solidmodeling.org, the home page of The Solid Modeling Association that oversees this symposium series. The SPM symposium series started initially with the name ACM Symposium on Solid Modeling and Applications. To emphasize the fact that solid modeling entails not only handling their geometric shapes, but also their physical properties, behaviors and simulations, the name of the symposium was expanded to The Symposium on Solid and Physical Modeling and Applications (abbreviated as SPM) in 2005. SPM'08 was held at Suny, Stony Brook from June 2 to June 4, as part of Stony Brook Modeling Week that also featured international joint convention on shapes and solids. SPM'08 was held as a single track conference, which also included two mini-symposia. In response to SPM'08 call for papers, 79 technical papers were submitted and reviewed by an international program committee with 96 expert reviewers from around the world. At least three external reviewers and members of the program committee reviewed and discussed each submission. A total of 25 refereed papers have been selected for plenary presentation and publication in the proceedings as full papers. Moreover, a total of 18 refereed papers have been selected for poster presentation and publication in the proceedings as short papers. The symposium program also includes three invited presentations, by Helmut Pottmann (Vienna University of Technology), Hugues Hoppe (Microsoft Research) and Kokichi Sugihara (University of Tokyo), all leading researchers in their fields.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.197

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations10
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topic3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207