MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092705625 · doi:10.1145/2019627.2019635

Steady affine motions and morphs

2011· article· en· W2092705625 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jarek Rossignac, Àlvar Vinacua

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónCanadian Psychological AssociationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAffine transformationMathematicsAffine coordinate systemAffine shape adaptationCombinatoricsPure mathematicsAffine combinationAffine space

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose to measure the quality of an affine motion by its steadiness, which we formulate as the inverse of its Average Relative Acceleration (ARA). Steady affine motions, for which ARA=0, include translations, rotations, screws, and the golden spiral. To facilitate the design of pleasing in-betweening motions that interpolate between an initial and a final pose (affine transformation), B and C , we propose the Steady Affine Morph (SAM), defined as A t ∘ B with A = C ∘ B -1 . A SAM is affine-invariant and reversible. It preserves isometries (i.e., rigidity), similarities, and volume. Its velocity field is stationary both in the global and the local (moving) frames. Given a copy count, n , the series of uniformly sampled poses, A i/n ∘ B , of a SAM form a regular pattern which may be easily controlled by changing B , C , or n , and where consecutive poses are related by the same affinity A 1/n . Although a real matrix A t does not always exist, we show that it does for a convex and large subset of orientation-preserving affinities A . Our fast and accurate Extraction of Affinity Roots (EAR) algorithm computes A t , when it exists, using closed-form expressions in two or in three dimensions. We discuss SAM applications to pattern design and animation and to key-frame interpolation.

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)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations30
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207