Structure-oriented networks of shape collections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We introduce a co-analysis technique designed for correspondence inference within large shape collections. Such collections are naturally rich in variation, adding ambiguity to the notoriously difficult problem of correspondence computation. We leverage the robustness of correspondences between similar shapes to address the difficulties associated with this problem. In our approach, pairs of similar shapes are extracted from the collection, analyzed and matched in an efficient and reliable manner, culminating in the construction of a network of correspondences that connects the entire collection. The correspondence between any pair of shapes then amounts to a simple propagation along the minimax path between the two shapes in the network. At the heart of our approach is the introduction of a robust, structure-oriented shape matching method. Leveraging the idea of projective analysis, we partition 2D projections of a shape to obtain a set of 1D ordered regions, which are both simple and efficient to match. We lift the matched projections back to the 3D domain to obtain a pairwise shape correspondence. The emphasis given to structural compatibility is a central tool in estimating the reliability and completeness of a computed correspondence, uncovering any non-negligible semantic discrepancies that may exist between shapes. These detected differences are a deciding factor in the establishment of a network aiming to capture local similarities. We demonstrate that the combination of the presented observations into a co-analysis method allows us to establish reliable correspondences among shapes within large collections.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".