MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064820211 · doi:10.1145/2024676.2024697

Artistic tessellations by growing curves

2011· article· en· W2064820211 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTexture (cosmology)Tessellation (computer graphics)Computer graphics (images)Set (abstract data type)Computer scienceComputer visionArtificial intelligenceIllusionField (mathematics)StackingGeometryImage (mathematics)MathematicsPhysicsPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we propose to tessellate a region by growing curves. We use a particle system, which flexibly provides good control over the final effects by variations of the initial placement, the placement order, curve direction, and curve properties. We also propose an automatic image-based mosaic method which has good texture indication, using a smoothed vector field to guide particle movement. The final irregular tessellation simulates stained glass where the elongated curved tiles suggest the content of highly textured areas. We give some additional applications, some of which resemble naturally occurring irregular patterns such as cracks and scales. We also notice that stacking a set of curves in a structured way can produce the illusion of a 3D shape.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.883
Threshold uncertainty score0.220

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.233 · 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