MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2403968758 · doi:10.1145/2893476

Guided Learning of Control Graphs for Physics-Based Characters

2016· article· en· W2403968758 on OpenAlexafffund
Libin Liu, Michiel van de Panne, KangKang Yin

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman Motion and Animation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBottleneckComputer scienceCLIPSGraphMotion captureFeedback controlMotion (physics)Artificial intelligenceTheoretical computer scienceControl engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The difficulty of developing control strategies has been a primary bottleneck in the adoption of physics-based simulations of human motion. We present a method for learning robust feedback strategies around given motion capture clips as well as the transition paths between clips. The output is a control graph that supports real-time physics-based simulation of multiple characters, each capable of a diverse range of robust movement skills, such as walking, running, sharp turns, cartwheels, spin-kicks, and flips. The control fragments that compose the control graph are developed using guided learning. This leverages the results of open-loop sampling-based reconstruction in order to produce state-action pairs that are then transformed into a linear feedback policy for each control fragment using linear regression. Our synthesis framework allows for the development of robust controllers with a minimal amount of prior knowledge.

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)0.004
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations109
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicHuman Motion and AnimationFrench-language works237,207