MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006461528 · doi:10.1145/2451236.2451238

A gradient-based implicit blend

2013· article· en· W2006461528 on OpenAlexafffund
Olivier Gourmel, Loïc Barthe, Marie‐Paule Cani, Brian Wyvill, Adrien Bernhardt, Mathias Paulin, Herbert Grasberger

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersEuropean Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNetworks of Centres of Excellence of CanadaAgence Nationale de la RechercheIntel Corporation
KeywordsConstructiveMerge (version control)Computer scienceComposition (language)AnimationBinary numberPolygon meshTheoretical computer scienceTopology (electrical circuits)AlgorithmComputational scienceComputer graphics (images)Parallel computingMathematicsProgramming languageProcess (computing)Arithmetic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce a new family of binary composition operators that solves four major problems of constructive implicit modeling: suppressing bulges when two shapes merge, avoiding unwanted blending at a distance, ensuring that the resulting shape keeps the topology of the union, and enabling sharp details to be added without being blown up. The key idea is that field functions should not only be combined based on their values, but also on their gradients . We implement this idea through a family of C ∞ composition operators evaluated on the GPU for efficiency, and illustrate it by applications to constructive modeling and animation.

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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.198 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations65
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topic3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207