MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147090978 · doi:10.1109/pccga.2003.1238292

Motion perturbation based on simple neuromotor control models

2004· article· en· W2147090978 on OpenAlexaff
KangKang Yin, M.B. Cline, Dinesh K. Pai

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman Motion and Animation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeed forwardCharacter animationAnimationComputer scienceInverse dynamicsKinematicsInverse kinematicsComputer animationMotion captureSkeletal animationMotion (physics)Perturbation (astronomy)Interactive skeleton-driven simulationDynamics (music)Component (thermodynamics)Control theory (sociology)Artificial intelligenceControl (management)Computer facial animationControl engineeringComputer graphics (images)EngineeringRobotPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motion capture is widely used for character animation. One of the major challenges of this technique is how to modify the captured motion in plausible ways. Previous work has focused on transformations based on kinematics and dynamics, but has not explicitly taken into account the emerging knowledge of how humans control their movement. In this paper, we show how this can be done using a simple human neuromuscular control model. Our model of muscle forces includes a feedforward term, and low-gain passive feedback. The feedforward component is calculated from motion capture data using inverse dynamics. The feedback component generates reaction forces to unexpected external disturbances. The perturbed animation is then resynthesized using forward dynamics. This allows us to create animation where the character reacts to unexpected external forces in a natural way (e.g., when the character is hit by a flying object), and still retain the quality of the captured motions. This technique is useful for applications such as interactive sports video games.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.192
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations58
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Motion and AnimationFrench-language works237,207