MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017311408 · doi:10.1145/2451236.2451241

Closest point turbulence for liquid surfaces

2013· article· en· W2017311408 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Theodore Kim, Jerry Tessendorf, Nils Thürey

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTurbulenceEmbeddingSurface (topology)AlgorithmPoint (geometry)Extension (predicate logic)GeneralizationOperator (biology)AdvectionComputer scienceField (mathematics)Resolution (logic)MathematicsMathematical analysisGeometryPhysicsArtificial intelligenceMechanicsPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a method of increasing the apparent spatial resolution of an existing liquid simulation. Previous approaches to this “up-resing” problem have focused on increasing the turbulence of the underlying velocity field. Motivated by measurements in the free surface turbulence literature, we observe that past certain frequencies, it is sufficient to perform a wave simulation directly on the liquid surface, and construct a reduced-dimensional surface-only simulation. We sidestep the considerable problem of generating a surface parameterization by employing an embedding technique known as the Closest Point Method (CPM) that operates directly on a 3D extension field. The CPM requires 3D operators, and we show that for surface operators with no natural 3D generalization, it is possible to construct a viable operator using the inverse Abel transform . We additionally propose a fast, frozen core closest point transform, and an advection method for the extension field that reduces smearing considerably. Finally, we propose two turbulence coupling methods that seed the high-resolution wave simulation in visually expected regions.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations49
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207