Analogy‐driven 3D style transfer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Style transfer aims to apply the style of an exemplar model to a target one, while retaining the target's structure. The main challenge in this process is to algorithmically distinguish style from structure, a high‐level, potentially ill‐posed cognitive task. Inspired by cognitive science research we recast style transfer in terms ofshape analogies. In IQ testing, shape analogy queries present the subject with three shapes:source, targetandexemplar, and ask them to select anoutputsuch that the transformation, oranalogy, from the exemplar to the output is similar to that from the source to the target. The logical process involved in identifying the source‐to‐target analogies implicitly detects the structural differences between the source and target and can be used effectively to facilitate style transfer. Since the exemplar has a similar structure to the source, applying the analogy to the exemplar will provide the output we seek. The main technical challenge we address is to compute the source to target analogies, consistent with human logic. We observe that the typical analogies we look for consist of a small set of simple transformations, which when applied to the exemplar generate a continuous, seamless output model. To assemble a shape analogy, we compute an optimal set of source‐to‐target transformations, such that the assembled analogy best fits these criteria. The assembled analogy is then applied to the exemplar shape to produce the desired output model. We use the proposed framework to seamlessly transfer a variety of style properties between 2D and 3D objects and demonstrate significant improvements over the state of the art in style transfer. We further show that our framework can be used to successfully complete partial scans with the help of a user provided structural template, coherently propagating scan style across the completed surfaces.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".