MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2957328186 · doi:10.1145/3306346.3322982

Direct delta mush skinning and variants

2019· article· en· W2957328186 on OpenAlexaff
Binh Huy Le, John Lewis

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsElectronic Arts (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSkinningComputer scienceSimple (philosophy)Quality (philosophy)AlgorithmImage (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A significant fraction of the world's population have experienced virtual characters through games and movies, and the possibility of online VR social experiences may greatly extend this audience. At present, the skin deformation for interactive and real-time characters is typically computed using geometric skinning methods. These methods are efficient and simple to implement, but obtaining quality results requires considerable manual "rigging" effort involving trial-and-error weight painting, the addition of virtual helper bones, etc. The recently introduced Delta Mush algorithm largely solves this rig authoring problem, but its iterative computational approach has prevented direct adoption in real-time engines. This paper introduces Direct Delta Mush, a new algorithm that simultaneously improves on the efficiency and control of Delta Mush while generalizing previous algorithms. Specifically, we derive a direct rather than iterative algorithm that has the same ballpark computational form as some previous geometric weight blending algorithms. Straightforward variants of the algorithm are then proposed to further optimize computational and storage cost with insignificant quality losses. These variants are equivalent to special cases of several previous skinning algorithms. Our algorithm simultaneously satisfies the goals of reasonable efficiency, quality, and ease of authoring. Further, its explicit decomposition of rotational and translational effects allows independent control over bending versus twisting deformation, as well as a skin sliding effect.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations32
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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