MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021361825

Proceedings of the 5th international symposium on Non-photorealistic animation and rendering

2007· article· en· W3021361825 on OpenAlexaff
Bruce Gooch, Maneesh Agrawala, Oliver Deußen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAugmented Reality Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRendering (computer graphics)AnimationComputer scienceComputer graphics (images)Computer animationNon-photorealistic renderingMultimediaComputer facial animation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Welcome to NPAR 2007, the fifth meeting of the International Symposium on Non-Photorealistic Animation and Rendering. For the first time in 2007 the symposium is co-located with SIGGRAPH and is being held August 4-5, 2007 in San Diego, California. Once again NPAR will bring together researchers and practitioners to showcase cutting-edge research in non-photorealistic animation and rendering systems and techniques. After the submission deadline in April, we assigned each of the 34 submissions to three committee members. At the end of the review period, committee members reached a consensus decision for each submission based on their initial reviews and an open discussion with additional committee members as needed. We settled upon the final set of 16 papers collected in this volume. Non-photorealistic animation and rendering (NPAR) refers to techniques for visually communicating ideas and information. Such techniques usually generate imagery which is expressive, rather than photorealistic. The papers in this volume present new research on both the mechanisms of non-photorealistic animation and rendering techniques as well as principles of visual communication via such artistic animation and rendering.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAugmented Reality ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207