Spacetime expression cloning for blendshapes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of a practical facial animation retargeting system is to reproduce the character of a source animation on a target face while providing room for additional creative control by the animator. This article presents a novel spacetime facial animation retargeting method for blendshape face models. Our approach starts from the basic principle that the source and target movements should be similar. By interpreting movement as the derivative of position with time, and adding suitable boundary conditions, we formulate the retargeting problem as a Poisson equation. Specified (e.g., neutral) expressions at the beginning and end of the animation as well as any user-specified constraints in the middle of the animation serve as boundary conditions. In addition, a model-specific prior is constructed to represent the plausible expression space of the target face during retargeting. A Bayesian formulation is then employed to produce target animation that is consistent with the source movements while satisfying the prior constraints. Since the preservation of temporal derivatives is the primary goal of the optimization, the retargeted motion preserves the rhythm and character of the source movement and is free of temporal jitter. More importantly, our approach provides spacetime editing for the popular blendshape representation of facial models, exhibiting smooth and controlled propagation of user edits across surrounding frames.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".