MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121048128 · doi:10.1109/icip.2009.5414447

Segmentation on surfaces with the Closest Point Method

2009· article· en· W2121048128 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 institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurface (topology)Interpolation (computer graphics)SegmentationMathematicsPartial differential equationPoint (geometry)Simple (philosophy)Image segmentationAlgorithmMathematical analysisComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGeometryImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a method to detect objects and patterns in textures on general surfaces. Our approach applies the Chan-Vese variational model for active contours without edges to the problem of segmentation of scalar surface data. This leads to gradient descent equations which are level set equations on surfaces. These equations are evolved using the Closest Point Method, which is a recent technique for solving partial differential equations (PDEs) on surfaces. The final algorithm has a particularly simple form: it merely alternates a time step of the usual Chan-Vese model in a small 3D neighborhood of the surface with an interpolation step. We remark that the method can treat very general surfaces since it uses a closest point function to represent the underlying surface. Various experimental results are presented, including segmentation on smooth surfaces, non-smooth surfaces, open surfaces, and general triangulated 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.

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 score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score0.187

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.303 · 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