MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137733660 · doi:10.1109/smi.2006.31

Robust 3D Shape Correspondence in the Spectral Domain

2006· article· en· W2137733660 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
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeodesicPolygon meshVertex (graph theory)Rigid transformationAlgorithmContext (archaeology)Shape analysis (program analysis)Computer scienceSpectral spaceDomain (mathematical analysis)ScalingMathematicsMultidimensional scalingRigid bodyGeometryMathematical analysisPure mathematicsCombinatoricsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an algorithm for finding a meaningful vertex-to-vertex correspondence between two 3D shapes given as triangle meshes. Our algorithm operates on embeddings of the two shapes in the spectral domain so as to normalize them with respect to uniform scaling and rigid-body transformation. Invariance to shape bending is achieved by relying on geodesic point proximities on a mesh to capture its shape. To deal with stretching, we propose to use non-rigid alignment via thin-plate splines in the spectral domain. This is combined with a refinement step based on the geodesic proximities to improve dense correspondence. We show empirically that our algorithm outperforms previous spectral methods, as well as schemes that compute correspondence in the spatial domain via non-rigid iterative closest points or the use of local shape descriptors, e.g., 3D shape context

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Quick stats

Citations151
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topic3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207