MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3108299468 · doi:10.1145/3414685.3417844

Freeform quad-based kirigami

2020· article· en· W3108299468 on OpenAlexaff
Caigui Jiang, Florian Rist, Helmut Pottmann, Johannes Wallner

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Materials and Mechanics
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
FundersKing Abdullah University of Science and TechnologyAustrian Science FundVienna Science and Technology Fund
KeywordsPolygon meshComputer scienceGaussProcess (computing)Surface (topology)Gaussian curvatureGeometryDomain (mathematical analysis)SkinningTransformation (genetics)Computer graphicsComputer graphics (images)PlanarGeometry processingComputational scienceMathematicsCurvatureMathematical analysisEngineeringPhysicsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kirigami, the traditional Japanese art of paper cutting and folding generalizes origami and has initiated new research in material science as well as graphics. In this paper we use its capabilities to perform geometric modeling with corrugated surface representations possessing an isometric unfolding into a planar domain after appropriate cuts are made. We initialize our box-based kirigami structures from orthogonal networks of curves, compute a first approximation of their unfolding via mappings between meshes, and complete the process by global optimization. Besides the modeling capabilities we also study the interesting geometry of special kirigami structures from the theoretical side. This experimental paper strives to relate unfoldable checkerboard arrangements of boxes to principal meshes, to the transformation theory of discrete differential geometry, and to a version of the Gauss theorema egregium.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.555

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicAdvanced Materials and MechanicsFrench-language works237,207