MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2417491466 · doi:10.1145/3087604.3087629

Matrix Representations by Means of Interpolation

2017· preprint· en· W2417491466 on OpenAlexaff
Ioannis Z. Emiris, Christos Konaxis, Ilias Kotsireas, Clément Laroche

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Numerical Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
FundersEuropean CommissionInstitut national de recherche en informatique et en automatique (INRIA)
KeywordsMapleParametric surfaceMathematicsInterpolation (computer graphics)Parametric statisticsMatrix (chemical analysis)Bicubic interpolationAlgebra over a fieldApplied mathematicsAlgorithmPure mathematicsComputer scienceMathematical analysisLinear interpolationImage (mathematics)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine implicit representations of parametric or point cloud models, based on interpolation matrices, which are not sensitive to base points. We show how interpolation matrices can be used for ray shooting of a parametric ray with a surface patch, including the case of high-multiplicity intersections. Most matrix operations are executed during pre-processing since they solely depend on the surface. For a given ray, the bottleneck is equation solving. Our Maple code handles bicubic patches in < 1 sec, though numerical issues might arise. Our second contribution is to extend the method to parametric space curves and, generally, to codimension > 1, by computing the equations of (hyper)surfaces intersecting precisely at the given object. By means of Chow forms, we propose a new, practical, randomized algorithm that always produces correct output but possibly with a non-minimal number of surfaces. For space curves, we typically obtain 3 surfaces whose polynomials are of near-optimal degree; in this case, computation reduces to a Sylvester resultant. Our Maple prototype is not faster but yields fewer equations and seems more robust than Maple's implicitize.

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 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.896
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Numerical Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207