MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006982329 · doi:10.5555/2386275.2386286

Parts, image, and sketch based 3D modeling method

2006· article· en· W2006982329 on OpenAlexaff
Jun Murakawa, Ilmi Yoon, Tracie Hong, Edward Lank

Bibliographic record

VenueSketch Based Interfaces and Modeling · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMorphingSketchComputer science3D modelingSoftwareDomain (mathematical analysis)Geometric modelingSolid modeling3d modelHuman–computer interactionInterface (matter)Artificial intelligenceTransformation (genetics)Computer graphics (images)Computer visionProgramming languageEngineeringAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite their many benefits, challenges exist in the creation of 3D models, particularly for individual not currently skilled with 3D modeling software. To address this, we explore the creation of 3D modeling software for non-domain experts that uses a hierarchical parts database of generic 3D models, and deforms models into specific related target objects using image guided 3D model morphing. A human-in-the-loop sketching interface supports image registration and constrains our geometrical transformation to support real time morphing of generic models into accurate representations of new objects for which users wish a 3D model. Applying the application to the study of insects in biology, we find that the application supports the creation of realistic 3D models, and that the application is of value to educators and researchers in entomology.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.004

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations7
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSketch Based Interfaces and ModelingSame topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207