MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168729417 · doi:10.5555/1632592.1632610

Motion-motif graphs

2008· article· en· W2168729417 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSymposium on Computer Animation · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman Motion and Animation
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMotif (music)Computer scienceMotion captureComputationArtificial intelligenceGraphComputer visionAlgorithmTheoretical computer scienceMotion (physics)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a technique to automatically distill a motion-motif graph from an arbitrary collection of motion capture data. Motion motifs represent clusters of similar motions and together with their encompassing motion graph they lend understandable structure to the contents and connectivity of large motion datasets. They can be used in support of motion compression, the removal of redundant motions, and the creation of blend spaces. This paper develops a string-based motif-finding algorithm which allows for a user-controlled compromise between motif length and the number of motions in a motif. It allows for time warps within motifs and assigns the majority of the input data to relevant motifs. Results are demonstrated for large datasets (more than 100,000 frames) with computation times of tens of minutes.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.453
Threshold uncertainty score0.853

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.187 · 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