MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Physically Based Deformable Models in Computer Graphics

2006· article· en· W2141654056 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Nealen, Matthias Müller, Richard Keiser, Eddy Boxerman, Mark Carlson

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Graphics Forum · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUbisoft (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer graphicsAnimationComputer graphics (images)DiscretizationCrowd simulationInteractive skeleton-driven simulationComputer animationEntertainmentFinite element methodParticle systemMotion captureComputer facial animationMotion (physics)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Physically based deformable models have been widely embraced by the Computer Graphics community. Many problems outlined in a previous survey by Gibson and Mirtich have been addressed, thereby making these models interesting and useful for both offline and real‐time applications, such as motion pictures and video games. In this paper, we present the most significant contributions of the past decade, which produce such impressive and perceivably realistic animations and simulations: finite element/difference/volume methods, mass‐spring systems, mesh‐free methods, coupled particle systems and reduced deformable models‐based on modal analysis. For completeness, we also make a connection to the simulation of other continua, such as fluids, gases and melting objects. Since time integration is inherent to all simulated phenomena, the general notion of time discretization is treated separately, while specifics are left to the respective models. Finally, we discuss areas of application, such as elastoplastic deformation and fracture, cloth and hair animation, virtual surgery simulation, interactive entertainment and fluid/smoke animation, and also suggest areas for future research.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations752
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Graphics ForumSame topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207