MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058987444 · doi:10.1111/1467-8659.00684

Precise Ink Drawing of 3D Models

2003· article· en· W2058987444 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Graphics Forum · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolygon meshComputer scienceRendering (computer graphics)CurvatureComputer graphics (images)Non-photorealistic renderingEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionArtificial intelligenceProcess (computing)Computer visionFeature (linguistics)GeometryAnimationMathematicsComputer animationComputer facial animation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Drawings made with precise pen strokes accurately reveal the geometric forms that give subjects their characteristicshape. We present a system for non‐photorealistic rendering of precise drawing strokes over dense 3Dtriangle meshes with arbitrary topology. During an automatic pre‐process, we construct an extended version ofthe edge‐buffer data structure to allow the calculation of shape measures at each mesh edge, by adapting numericalmethods used in geomorphology. At runtime, feature edges related to shape measures are extracted andrendered as strokes with varying thickness and pen marking styles. Stroke thickness is automatically adjusted byconsidering surface curvature. Pen marking styles and visual effects of ink distribution are both controlled by theuser. We demonstrate precise drawing strokes over complex meshes revealing a variety of shape characteristics.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.790
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.268
Teacher spread0.243 · 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