MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995871604 · doi:10.1109/pg.2007.40

Model Composition from Interchangeable Components

2007· article· en· W1995871604 on OpenAlexafffund
Vladislav Kreavoy, Dan Julius, Alla Sheffer

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsShufflingComponent (thermodynamics)Computer scienceSet (abstract data type)Class (philosophy)SegmentationTheoretical computer scienceArtificial intelligenceDistributed computingHuman–computer interactionProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following the increasing demand to make the creation and manipulation of 3D geometry simpler and more accessible, we introduce a modeling approach that allows even novice users to create sophisticated models in minutes. Our approach is based on the observation that in many modeling settings users create models which belong to a small set of model classes, such as humans or quadrupeds. The models within each class typically share a common component structure. Following this observation, we introduce a modeling system which utilizes this common component structure allowing users to create new models by shuffling interchangeable components between existing models. To enable shuffling, we develop a method for computing a compatible segmentation of input models into meaningful, interchangeable components. Using this segmentation our system lets users create new models with a few mouse clicks, in a fraction of the time required by previous composition techniques. We demonstrate that the shuffling paradigm allows for easy and fast creation of a rich geometric content.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations74
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207