MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048483554 · doi:10.1145/3386569.3392419

Developability of heightfields via rank minimization

2020· article· en· W3048483554 on OpenAlexafffund
Silvia Sellán, Noam Aigerman, Alec Jacobson

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of CanadaAutodeskAdobe Systems
KeywordsDevelopable surfaceSolverComputer scienceRegular polygonPiecewiseConvex optimizationRank (graph theory)Surface (topology)Projection (relational algebra)Mathematical optimizationMathematicsAlgorithmGeometryCombinatoricsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work concerns the computation and approximation of developable surfaces --- surfaces that are locally isometric to the two-dimensional plane. These surfaces are heavily studied in differential geometry, and are also of great interest to fabrication, architecture and fashion. We focus specifically on developability of heightfields. Our main observation is that developability can be cast as a rank constraint, which can then be plugged into theoretically-grounded rank-minimization techniques from the field of compressed sensing. This leads to a convex semidefinite optimization problem, which receives an input heightfield and recovers a similar heightfield which is developable. Due to the sparsifying nature of compressed sensing, the recovered surface is piecewise developable, with creases emerging between connected developable pieces. The convex program includes one user-specified parameter, balancing adherence to the original surface with developability and number of patches. We moreover show, that in contrast to previous techniques, our discretization does not introduce a bias and the same results are achieved across resolutions and orientations, and with no limit on the number of creases and patches. We solve this convex semidefinite optimization problem efficiently, by devising a tailor-made ADMM solver which leverages matrix-projection observations unique to our problem. We employ our method on a plethora of experiments, from denoising 3D scans of developable geometry such as documents and buildings, through approximating general heightfields with developable ones, and up to interpolating sparse annotations with a developable heightfield.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations30
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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