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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rich signals we extract from facial expressions imposes high expectations for the science and art of facial animation. While the advent of high-resolution performance capture has greatly improved realism, the utility of procedural animation warrants a prominent place in facial animation workflow. We present a system that, given an input audio soundtrack and speech transcript, automatically generates expressive lip-synchronized facial animation that is amenable to further artistic refinement, and that is comparable with both performance capture and professional animator output. Because of the diversity of ways we produce sound, the mapping from phonemes to visual depictions as visemes is many-valued. We draw from psycholinguistics to capture this variation using two visually distinct anatomical actions: Ja w and L ip, wheresound is primarily controlled by jaw articulation and lower-face muscles, respectively. We describe the construction of a transferable template jali 3D facial rig, built upon the popular facial muscle action unit representation facs. We show that acoustic properties in a speech signal map naturally to the dynamic degree of jaw and lip in visual speech. We provide an array of compelling animation clips, compare against performance capture and existing procedural animation, and report on a brief user study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it