MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790028039 · doi:10.1145/3182158

Semi-Supervised Co-Analysis of 3D Shape Styles from Projected Lines

2018· article· en· W2790028039 on OpenAlexafffund
Fenggen Yu, Yan Zhang, Kai Xu, Ali Mahdavi‐Amiri, Hao Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceCluster analysisArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Feature (linguistics)Shape analysis (program analysis)Style analysisPipeline (software)Style (visual arts)Static analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a semi-supervised co-analysis method for learning 3D shape styles from projected feature lines , achieving style patch localization with only weak supervision. Given a collection of 3D shapes spanning multiple object categories and styles, we perform style co-analysis over projected feature lines of each 3D shape and then back-project the learned style features onto the 3D shapes. Our core analysis pipeline starts with mid-level patch sampling and pre-selection of candidate style patches. Projective features are then encoded via patch convolution. Multi-view feature integration and style clustering are carried out under the framework of partially shared latent factor (PSLF) learning, a multi-view feature learning scheme. PSLF achieves effective multi-view feature fusion by distilling and exploiting consistent and complementary feature information from multiple views, while also selecting style patches from the candidates. Our style analysis approach supports both unsupervised and semi-supervised analysis. For the latter, our method accepts both user-specified shape labels and style-ranked triplets as clustering constraints. We demonstrate results from 3D shape style analysis and patch localization as well as improvements over state-of-the-art methods. We also present several applications enabled by our style analysis.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.323
Threshold uncertainty score0.785

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topic3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207