MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2165800119 · doi:10.1109/cgi.2003.1214448

Modeling lobed leaves

2004· article· en· W2165800119 on OpenAlexafffund
Lars Mündermann, Peter MacMurchy, J. Pivovarov, Przemysław Prusinkiewicz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDepartment of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Australian Government
KeywordsSilhouetteMedial axisSkeleton (computer programming)Computer scienceSpline (mechanical)Computer visionArtificial intelligenceTopological skeletonSurface (topology)GeometryBranching (polymer chemistry)AlgorithmComputer graphics (images)MathematicsActive shape modelEngineeringStructural engineeringSegmentation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In contrast to the extensively researched modeling of plant architecture, the modeling of plant organs largely remains an open problem. We propose a method for modeling lobed leaves. This method extends the concept of sweeps to branched skeletons. The input of the model is a 2D leaf silhouette, which can be defined interactively or derived from a scanned leaf image. The algorithm computes the skeleton (medial axis) of the leaf and approximates it using spline curves interconnected into a branching structure (sticky splines). The leaf surface is then constructed by sweeping a generating curve along these splines. The orientation of the generating curve is adjusted to properly capture the shape of the leaf blade near the extremities and branching points of the skeleton, and to avoid self-intersections of the surface. The leaf model can be interactively modified by editing the shape of the silhouette and the skeleton. It can be further manipulated in 3D using functions that control turning, bending, and twisting of each lobe.

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 score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations51
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207