MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2579013894 · doi:10.1109/ism.2016.0060

Robust Human Animation Skeleton Extraction Using Compatibility and Correctness Constraints

2016· article· en· W2579013894 on OpenAlexaff
Nasim Hajari, Irene Cheng, Anup Basu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman Motion and Animation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAnimationSkeletal animationMotion captureCorrectnessComputer animationInteractive skeleton-driven simulationArtificial intelligenceComputer facial animationComputer graphics (images)Computer visionSoftwareMotion (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability to automatically animate arbitrary 3D characters based on motion capture (MoCap) data has many applications in simulation, entertainment and multimedia transmission. However, defining trajectory key-points in human figures for animation without any manual intervention remains a challenging problem that makes complete automation difficult. To animate an articulated 3D character an animation skeleton needs to be extracted from, or be embedded into, a 3D model for deformation during animation. In conventional animation software, this process is mostly done manually by expert animators, which makes it a very tedious and time consuming step. The automatic rigging approaches proposed in the literature require a front facing model with neutral T-pose to accurately extract or embed an animation skeleton. We propose a fully automatic skeleton extraction approach based on optimization of constraints on human shape that can generate the animation skeleton, regardless of the model's orientation and position. Experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach. Robust skeleton extraction followed by efficient MoCap data compression can greatly improve the fidelity of 3D animated model transmission.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Motion and AnimationFrench-language works237,207