MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2782905316 · doi:10.4018/ijcicg.2017070104

Priority-Based Stippling and its Stylization Applications

2017· article· en· W2782905316 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Creative Interfaces and Computer Graphics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStylized factComputer scienceFlexibility (engineering)PixelContrast (vision)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionVariety (cybernetics)Process (computing)Nonlinear systemAlgorithmTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a new and efficient automatic method for structure-preserving stippling. The core idea is to concentrate on structure preservation by using a priority-based scheme that treats extremal pixels first and preferentially assigns positive error to lighter pixels and negative error to darker pixels, emphasizing contrast. The use of a nonlinear spatial function to shrink or exaggerate errors implicitly provides global adjustment of density. Personal adjustment respects contrast and hence allows people to preserve structure even with few stipples. Beyond the advantage of good structure preservation, the algorithm provides many variations to extend personal stippling to other artistic styles. In addition, it is demonstrated that variations on priority-based schemes, by a multiple-stage process, can provide flexibility to promote different kinds of interesting features. This article explores a variety of stylized effects, including heightening, scratchboard, and line drawing, all within the unifying framework of stippling.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.311 · 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