MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2730617731 · doi:10.1111/cgf.13252

A Dirac Operator for Extrinsic Shape Analysis

2017· article· en· W2730617731 on OpenAlexaff
Hsueh‐Ti Derek Liu, Alec Jacobson, Keenan Crane

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Graphics Forum · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersAdobe SystemsNational Science Foundation
KeywordsOperator (biology)EigenfunctionLaplace–Beltrami operatorMathematicsDirac operatorEigenvalues and eigenvectorsSpectrum (functional analysis)Laplace operatorSurface (topology)Metric (unit)Mathematical analysisDifferential operatorGeometryBoundary value problemPhysicsp-Laplacian

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The eigenfunctions and eigenvalues of the Laplace‐Beltrami operator have proven to be a powerful tool for digital geometry processing, providing a description of geometry that is essentially independent of coordinates or the choice of discretization. However, since Laplace‐Beltrami is purely intrinsic it struggles to capture important phenomena such as extrinsic bending, sharp edges, and fine surface texture. We introduce a new extrinsic differential operator called the relative Dirac operator, leading to a family of operators with a continuous trade‐off between intrinsic and extrinsic features. Previous operators are either fully or partially intrinsic. In contrast, the proposed family spans the entire spectrum: from completely intrinsic (depending only on the metric) to completely extrinsic (depending only on the Gauss map). By adding an infinite potential well to this (or any) operator we can also robustly handle surface patches with irregular boundary. We explore use of these operators for a variety of shape analysis tasks, and study their performance relative to operators previously found in the geometry processing literature.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations29
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Graphics ForumSame topic3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207