Bibliographic record
Abstract
Haptic rendering is referred to as an approach for complementing graphical model of the virtual object with mechanics- based properties. As a result, when the user interacts with the virtual object through a haptic device, the object can graphically deflect or deform following laws of mechanics. In addition, the user is able to feel the resulting interaction force when interacting with the virtual object. This paper presents a study of defining the levels-of-detail (LOD) in point-based computational mechanics for haptic rendering of objects. The approach uses the description of object as a set of sampled points. In comparison with the finite element method (FEM), point-based approach does not rely on any predefined mesh representation and depends on the point representation of the volume of the object. Different from solving the governing equations of motion representing the entire object based on pre-defined mesh representation which is used in FEM, in point-based modeling approach, the number of points involved in the computation of displacement/deformation can be adaptively defined during the solution cycle. This frame work can offer the implementation of the notion for levels-of-detail techniques for which can be used to tune the haptic rendering environment for in- creased realism and computational efficiency. This paper presents some initial experimental studies in implementing LOD in such environment.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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.
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".