A Part‐aware Surface Metric for Shape Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The notion of parts in a shape plays an important role in many geometry problems, including segmentation, correspondence, recognition, editing, and animation. As the fundamental geometric representation of 3D objects in computer graphics is surface‐based, solutions of many such problems utilize a surface metric, a distance function defined over pairs of points on the surface, to assist shape analysis and understanding. The main contribution of our work is to bring together these two fundamental concepts: shape parts and surface metric. Specifically, we develop a surface metric that is part‐aware. To encode part information at a point on a shape, we model its volumetric context – called the volumetric shape image (VSI) – inside the shape's enclosed volume, to capture relevant visibility information. We then define the part‐aware metric by combining an appropriate VSI distance with geodesic distance and normal variation. We show how the volumetric view on part separation addresses certain limitations of the surface view, which relies on concavity measures over a surface as implied by the well‐known minima rule. We demonstrate how the new metric can be effectively utilized in various applications including mesh segmentation, shape registration, part‐aware sampling and shape retrieval.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".