Computing smooth surface contours with accurate topology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article introduces a method for accurately computing the visible contours of a smooth 3D surface for stylization. This is a surprisingly difficult problem, and previous methods are prone to topological errors, such as gaps in the outline. Our approach is to generate, for each viewpoint, a new triangle mesh with contours that are topologically equivalent and geometrically close to those of the original smooth surface. The contours of the mesh can then be rendered with exact visibility. The core of the approach is Contour Consistency, a way to prove topological equivalence between the contours of two surfaces. Producing a surface tessellation that satisfies this property is itself challenging; to this end, we introduce a type of triangle that ensures consistency at the contour. We then introduce an iterative mesh generation procedure, based on these ideas. This procedure does not fully guarantee consistency, but errors are not noticeable in our experiments. Our algorithm can operate on any smooth input surface representation; we use Catmull-Clark subdivision surfaces in our implementation. We demonstrate results computing contours of complex 3D objects, on which our method eliminates the contour artifacts of other methods.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".