MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2985503493 · doi:10.1111/cgf.13885

The <i>Matchstick</i> Model for Anisotropic Friction Cones

2019· article· en· W2985503493 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Graphics Forum · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDynamics and Control of Mechanical Systems
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceAnisotropyComputer graphics (images)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Inspired by frictional behaviour that is observed when sliding matchsticks against one another at different angles, we propose a phenomenological anisotropic friction model for structured surfaces. Our model interpolates isotropic and anisotropic elliptical Coulomb friction parameters for a pair of surfaces with perpendicular and parallel structure directions (e.g. the wood grain direction). We view our model as a special case of an abstract friction model that produces a cone based on state information, specifically the relationship between structure directions. We show how our model can be integrated into LCP and NCP‐based simulators using different solvers with both explicit and fully implicit time‐integration. The focus of our work is on symmetric friction cones, and we therefore demonstrate a variety of simulation scenarios where the friction structure directions play an important part in the resulting motions. Consequently, authoring of friction using our model is intuitive and we demonstrate that our model is compatible with standard authoring practices, such as texture mapping.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.177 · 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