MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041411484 · doi:10.1145/2461912.2461923

Layered analysis of irregular facades via symmetry maximization

2013· article· en· W2041411484 on OpenAlexaff
Hao Zhang, Kai Xu, Wei Jiang, Jinjie Lin, Daniel Cohen‐Or, Baoquan Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFacadeMaximizationSymmetry (geometry)Homogeneous spaceComputer scienceRepresentation (politics)LayeringGeometryMathematicsMathematical optimizationStructural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an algorithm for hierarchical and layered analysis of irregular facades, seeking a high-level understanding of facade structures. By introducing layering into the analysis, we no longer view a facade as a flat structure, but allow it to be structurally separated into depth layers, enabling more compact and natural interpretations of building facades. Computationally, we perform a symmetry-driven search for an optimal hierarchical decomposition defined by split and layering operations applied to an input facade. The objective is symmetry maximization , i.e., to maximize the sum of symmetry of the substructures resulting from recursive decomposition. To this end, we propose a novel integral symmetry measure, which behaves well at both ends of the symmetry spectrum by accounting for all partial symmetries in a discrete structure. Our analysis results in a structural representation, which can be utilized for structural editing and exploration of building facades.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.230 · 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
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

Citations73
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207