Variational B-rep model analysis for direct modeling using geometric perturbation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The very recent CAD paradigm of direct modeling gives rise to the need of processing 3D geometric constraint systems defined on boundary representation (B-rep) models. The major issue of processing such variational B-rep models (in the STEP format) is that free motions of a well-constrained model involve more than just rigid-body motions. The fundamental difficulty lies in having a systematic description of what pattern these free motions follow. This paper proposes a geometric perturbation method to study these free motions. This method is a generalization of the witness method, allowing it to directly deal with variational B-rep models represented by the STEP format. This generalization is essentially achieved by using a direct, geometric representation of the free motions, and then expressing the free motions in terms of composites of several basis motions. To demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method, a series of comparisons and case studies are presented. Highlights A new method to analyze geometric constraint systems for direct modeling. A generalization of the witness configuration method. A new method to characterize the constraint states of variational B-rep models.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".