MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996233302 · doi:10.14288/1.0387124

Measuring, modelling, simulating, and predicting human tissue properties

2021· article· en· W2996233302 on OpenAlexaff
Austin Rothwell

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMedical Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Personalized simulation of human bodies is a long standing goal in many applications, ranging from animation to apparel. Even though personalized geometric models can now be easily acquired, physics-based simulation requires soft tissue properties and their distribution over the person’s body. Here we show that mechanical properties of the human body can be directly measured using a novel hand-held device. We describe a complete pipeline for measurement, modeling, parameter estimation, and simulation. The methods described here can be used to create personalized models of an individual human or of a population. Furthermore, we show how to predict soft tissue properties from widely available 3D geometric models of the human body. To train such a prediction model, we utilize a unique database of registered measurements of body shape and soft tissue properties, acquired from over 70 participants. We use a recently introduced convolutional neural network architecture adapted for 3D surfaces, and train the network to predict the distribution of tissue properties over the 3D human body surface. Once the network is trained, no specialized equipment is required, and soft tissue properties are predicted in minutes. The method can be used with commodity 3D scanners, and even with geometric models downloaded from Internet or created by artists. Our methods make realistic human body simulations available to a wide range of users and applications.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.738
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.172
Teacher spread0.150 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicMedical Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207