Proceedings of the 2003 ACM SIGGRAPH/Eurographics symposium on Computer animation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Symposium on Computer Animation is an emerging, eminent forum for dissemination of the latest research results in computer animation. The goal of the symposium is to provide an opportunity for researchers in computer animation to interact with one another, share new results, and discuss emerging directions for the field. This year the Symposium on Computer Animation is co-located with SIGGRAPH and held just prior to the main conference in order to attract a broad range of participants.These proceedings contain the 23 long papers and 15 short papers presented at the Symposium on Computer Animation, selected from over 100 submissions. Each paper was reviewed by at least 5 members of the program committee and external reviewers. The remarkable quality of the submissions made the final acceptance decision very difficult. The selected papers cover a variety of topics ranging from physically-based simulation, facial and articulated body animation, motion capture and editing, natural phenomena and procedural modeling, animated arts and presentations, autonomous characters, and novel interfaces for animation.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it