MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102556003 · doi:10.1145/1964921.1964975

Photo-inspired model-driven 3D object modeling

2011· article· en· W2102556003 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersMinistry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of ChinaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceUSableSilhouette3D modelingObject (grammar)Computer visionArtificial intelligenceSet (abstract data type)Object modelProcess (computing)Geometric modelingSegmentationSolid modeling3d modelComputer graphics (images)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce an algorithm for 3D object modeling where the user draws creative inspiration from an object captured in a single photograph. Our method leverages the rich source of photographs for creative 3D modeling. However, with only a photo as a guide, creating a 3D model from scratch is a daunting task. We support the modeling process by utilizing an available set of 3D candidate models. Specifically, the user creates a digital 3D model as a geometric variation from a 3D candidate. Our modeling technique consists of two major steps. The first step is a user-guided image-space object segmentation to reveal the structure of the photographed object. The core step is the second one, in which a 3D candidate is automatically deformed to fit the photographed target under the guidance of silhouette correspondence. The set of candidate models have been pre-analyzed to possess useful high-level structural information, which is heavily utilized in both steps to compensate for the ill-posedness of the analysis and modeling problems based only on content in a single image. Equally important, the structural information is preserved by the geometric variation so that the final product is coherent with its inherited structural information readily usable for subsequent model refinement or processing.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.216 · 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