MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965341313 · doi:10.1068/b12984

Recursive Voronoi Diagrams

2003· article· en· W1965341313 on OpenAlexaff
Barry Boots, Narushige Shiode

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Planning B Planning and Design · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Modeling in Geospatial Applications
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVoronoi diagramDelaunay triangulationBowyer–Watson algorithmCentroidal Voronoi tessellationGenerator (circuit theory)Tessellation (computer graphics)Set (abstract data type)Computer scienceTheoretical computer scienceConstrained Delaunay triangulationAlgorithmMathematicsObject (grammar)Topology (electrical circuits)CombinatoricsGeometryComputer graphics (images)Artificial intelligenceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces procedures involving the recursive construction of Voronoi diagrams and Delaunay tessellations. In such constructions, Voronoi and Delaunay concepts are used to tessellate an object space with respect to a given set of generators and then the construction is repeated every time with a new generator set, which comprises members selected from the previous generator set plus features of the current tessellation. Such constructions are shown to provide an integrating conceptual framework for a number of disparate procedures, as well as extending the existing functionality of the basic Voronoi and Delaunay procedures to variable spatial resolutions. Further, because they are shown to be fractal in nature, it is suggested that this characteristic can be exploited in the development of new strategies for spatial modelling.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Planning B Planning and DesignSame topic3D Modeling in Geospatial ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207