MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148103003 · doi:10.1111/cgf.12162

An Efficient Algorithm for Determining an Aesthetic Shape Connecting Unorganized 2D Points

2013· article· en· W2148103003 on OpenAlexafffund
Stefan Ohrhallinger, Sudhir P. Mudur

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Graphics Forum · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBoundary (topology)MathematicsAlgorithmEuclidean geometryGraphGreedy algorithmComputer scienceTopology (electrical circuits)GeometryCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present anefficient algorithm for determining an aesthetically pleasing shape boundary connecting all the points in a given unorganized set of 2D points, with no other information than point coordinates. By posing shape construction as a minimisation problem which follows the Gestalt laws, our desired shape is non‐intersecting, interpolates all points and minimizes a criterion related to these laws. The basis for our algorithm is an initial graph, an extension of the Euclidean minimum spanning tree but with no leaf nodes, called as the minimum boundary complex . and can be expressed similarly by parametrizing a topological constraint. A close approximation of , termed can be computed fast using a greedy algorithm. is then transformed into a closed interpolating boundary in two steps to satisfy ’s topological and minimization requirements. Computing exactly is an NP (Non‐Polynomial)‐hard problem, whereas is computed in linearithmic time. We present many examples showing considerable improvement over previous techniques, especially for shapes with sharp corners. Source code is available online.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.255
Teacher spread0.240 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations18
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Graphics ForumSame topicComputational Geometry and Mesh GenerationFrench-language works237,207