FlowRep
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present FlowRep , an algorithm for extracting descriptive compact 3D curve networks from meshes of free-form man-made shapes. We infer the desired compact curve network from complex 3D geometries by using a series of insights derived from perception, computer graphics, and design literature. These sources suggest that visually descriptive networks are cycle-descriptive , i.e their cycles unambiguously describe the geometry of the surface patches they surround. They also indicate that such networks are designed to be projectable , or easy to envision when observed from a static general viewpoint; in other words, 2D projections of the network should be strongly indicative of its 3D geometry. Research suggests that both properties are best achieved by using networks dominated by flowlines , surface curves aligned with principal curvature directions across anisotropic regions and strategically extended across sharp-features and isotropic areas. Our algorithm leverages these observation in the construction of a compact descriptive curve network. Starting with a curvature aligned quad dominant mesh we first extract sequences of mesh edges that form long, well-shaped and reliable flowlines by leveraging directional similarity between nearby meaningful flowline directions We then use a compact subset of the extracted flowlines and the model's sharp-feature, or trim, curves to form a sparse, projectable network which describes the underlying surface. We validate our method by demonstrating a range of networks computed from diverse inputs, using them for surface reconstruction, and showing extensive comparisons with prior work and artist generated networks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.039 | 0.019 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".