MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054569860 · doi:10.1109/tvcg.2014.2314658

Diverse Motions and Character Shapes for Simulated Skills

2014· article· en· W2054569860 on OpenAlexafffund
Shailen Agrawal, Shuo Shen, Michiel van de Panne

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman Motion and Animation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsComputer scienceParameterized complexityCharacter (mathematics)Metric (unit)Set (abstract data type)Motion (physics)Character animationArtificial intelligenceRange (aeronautics)Pairwise comparisonAlgorithmMathematicsComputer graphics (images)Computer animationGeometryAnimation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an optimization framework that produces a diverse range of motions for physics-based characters for tasks such as jumps, flips, and walks. This stands in contrast to the more common use of optimization to produce a single optimal motion. The solutions can be optimized to achieve motion diversity or diversity in the proportions of the simulated characters. As input, the method takes a character model, a parameterized controller for a successful motion instance, a set of constraints that should be preserved, and a pairwise distance metric. An offline optimization then produces a highly diverse set of motion styles or, alternatively, motions that are adapted to a diverse range of character shapes. We demonstrate results for a variety of 2D and 3D physics-based motions, showing that the approach can generate compelling new variations of simulated skills.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations11
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer GraphicsSame topicHuman Motion and AnimationFrench-language works237,207