MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997608580 · doi:10.5555/846276.846323

FootSee: an interactive animation system

2003· article· en· W1997608580 on OpenAlexaff
KangKang Yin, Dinesh K. Pai

Bibliographic record

VenueSymposium on Computer Animation · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman Motion and Animation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAnimationAvatarMotion captureInverse kinematicsSkeletal animationKinematicsComputer animationMotion (physics)Low latency (capital markets)Virtual realityComputer graphics (images)Latency (audio)Interface (matter)Computer visionArtificial intelligenceComputer facial animationHuman–computer interactionRobot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an intuitive animation interface that uses a foot pressure sensor pad to interactively control avatars for video games, virtual reality, and low-cost performance-driven animation. During an offline training phase, we capture full body motions with a motion capture system, as well as the corresponding foot-ground pressure distributions with a pressure sensor pad, into a database. At run time, the user acts out the animation desired on the pressure sensor pad. The system then tries to see the motion only through the foot-ground interactions measured, and the most appropriate motions from the database are selected, and edited online to drive the avatar. We describe our motion recognition, motion blending, and inverse kinematics algorithms in detail. They are easy to implement, and cheap to compute. FootSee can control a virtual avatar in a fixed latency of 1 second with reasonable accuracy. Our system thus makes it possible to create interactive animations without the cost or inconveniences of a full body motion capture system.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.165

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0490.005

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.212 · 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
GenreSoftware

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

Citations86
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSymposium on Computer AnimationSame topicHuman Motion and AnimationFrench-language works237,207