MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150235633 · doi:10.1145/2019406.2019442

Biomechanically-inspired motion path editing

2011· article· en· W2150235633 on OpenAlexaff
Noah Lockwood, Karan Singh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman Motion and Animation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCarnegie Mellon University
KeywordsKinematicsMotion (physics)Path (computing)Computer scienceAccelerationComputer visionProcess (computing)HeuristicsArtificial intelligenceMotion controlTrajectoryCurvatureMotion captureMotion planningMathematicsPhysicsGeometryRobotClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a system for interactive kinematic editing of motion paths and timing that employs various biomechanical observations to augment and restrict the edited motion. Realistic path manipulations are enforced by restricting user interaction to handles identified along a motion path using motion extrema. An as-rigid-as-possible deformation technique modified specifically for use on motion paths is used to deform the path to satisfy the usermanipulated handle positions. After all motion poses have been adjusted to satisfy the new path, an automatic timewarping step modifies the timing of the new motion to preserve the timing qualities of the original motion. This timewarp is based on biomechanical heuristics relating velocity to stride length and path curvature, as well as the preservation of acceleration for ballistic motion. We show that our system can be used to quickly and easily modify a variety of locomotive motions, and can accurately reproduce recorded motions that were not used during the editing process.

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)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.168 · 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

Citations16
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Motion and AnimationFrench-language works237,207