MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026066447 · doi:10.1145/2816795.2818059

Garment modeling with a depth camera

2015· article· en· W2026066447 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaowu Chen, Bin Zhou, Feixiang Lu, Lin Wang, Lang Bi, Ping Tan

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceFocus (optics)CollarRGB color modelComputer visionComponent (thermodynamics)Computer graphics (images)Engineering drawingEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous garment modeling techniques mainly focus on designing novel garments to dress up virtual characters. We study the modeling of real garments and develop a system that is intuitive to use even for novice users. Our system includes garment component detectors and design attribute classifiers learned from a manually labeled garment image database. In the modeling time, we scan the garment with a Kinect and build a rough shape by KinectFusion from the raw RGBD sequence. The detectors and classifiers will identify garment components (e.g. collar, sleeve, pockets, belt, and buttons) and their design attributes (e.g. falbala collar or lapel collar, hubble-bubble sleeve or straight sleeve ) from the RGB images. Our system also contains a 3D deformable template database for garment components. Once the components and their designs are determined, we choose appropriate templates, stitch them together, and fit them to the initial garment mesh generated by KinectFusion. Experiments on various different garment styles consistently generate high quality 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.235
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations78
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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