MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006355160 · doi:10.1145/2021164.2021190

Neatening sketched strokes using piecewise French curves

2011· article· en· W2006355160 on OpenAlexaff
James McCrae, Karan Singh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Numerical Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurvatureClassification of discontinuitiesPiecewiseComputer scienceSketchCurve fittingAlgorithmSet (abstract data type)Stroke (engine)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsGeometryMathematical analysisMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We apply traditional bimanual curve modeling using French curves to the problem of automatic neatening of sketched strokes. Given a sketched input stroke and a set of template French curves we present an approach that fits the stroke using an optimal number of French curve segments. Our algorithm operates in both curvature and point space, reconstructing the salient curvature profiles of French curve segments, while limiting error accumulation resulting from curvature integration. User-controlled parameters allow the neatened stroke to model G2 continuous curves, capture G1 discontinuities, define closed curves and explore the trade-off between fitting error and the number of French curve segments used. We present an interactive sketch stroke neatening implementation to demonstrate the real-time performance of our algorithm and evaluate the quality of its results.

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)0.006
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations17
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Numerical Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207