MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000257662 · doi:10.5555/2422356.2422389

Misconceptions of PD control in animation

2012· article· en· W2000257662 on OpenAlexaff
Brian F. Allen, Petros Faloutsos

Bibliographic record

VenueSymposium on Computer Animation · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman Motion and Animation
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnimationOffset (computer science)Computer scienceController (irrigation)Control theory (sociology)Derivative (finance)Feed forwardTerm (time)Zero (linguistics)Control (management)InfinityCalculus (dental)Applied mathematicsMathematicsControl engineeringArtificial intelligenceComputer graphics (images)Mathematical analysisPhysicsEngineeringProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we address certain misconceptions that have been perpetuated in the animation practice and research for quite some time related to the proportional-derivative (PD) control of physics-based systems. Because in animation we often think in terms of targeting keyframes, we tend to forget that PD control, in its simple form, has a very specific asymptotic behavior that approaches zero (or an offset) with zero velocity as time approaches infinity. We pay particular attention to the issue of introducing a desired or velocity term in the equation of a proportional-derivative controller, and discuss how this term should be interpreted and how it relates to feedforward control rather than an end derivative problem.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.087
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.087
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.034
Scholarly communication0.0060.012
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0080.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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