MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mean Curvature Skeletons

2012· article· en· W1963962785 on OpenAlexaff
Andrea Tagliasacchi, Ibraheem Alhashim, Matt Olson, Hao Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Graphics Forum · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSkeletonizationMedial axisCurvatureDiscretizationGeometryComputationTopology (electrical circuits)Voronoi diagramMathematicsFlow (mathematics)Computer scienceAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Inspired by recent developments in contraction‐based curve skeleton extraction, we formulate the skeletonization problem via mean curvature flow (MCF). While the classical application of MCF is surface fairing, we take advantage of its area‐minimizing characteristic to drive the curvature flow towards the extreme so as to collapse the input mesh geometry and obtain a skeletal structure. By analyzing the differential characteristics of the flow, we reveal that MCF locally increases shape anisotropy. This justifies the use of curvature motion for skeleton computation, and leads to the generation of what we call “mean curvature skeletons”. To obtain a stable and efficient discretization, we regularize the surface mesh by performing local remeshing via edge splits and collapses. Simplifying mesh connectivity throughout the motion leads to more efficient computation and avoids numerical instability arising from degeneracies in the triangulation. In addition, the detection of collapsed geometry is facilitated by working with simplified mesh connectivity and monitoring potential non‐manifold edge collapses. With topology simplified throughout the flow, minimal post‐processing is required to convert the collapsed geometry to a curve. Formulating skeletonization via MCF allows us to incorporate external energy terms easily, resulting in a constrained flow. We define one such energy term using the Voronoi medial skeleton and obtain a medially centred curve skeleton. We call the intermediate results of our skeletonization motion meso‐skeletons ; these consist of a mixture of curves and surface sheets as appropriate to the local 3D geometry they capture.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations242
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Graphics ForumSame topic3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207