GraphSeam: Supervised Graph Learning Framework for Semantic UV Mapping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently there has been a significant effort to automate UV mapping, the process of mapping 3D-dimensional surfaces to the UV space while minimizing distortion and seam length. Although state-of-the-art methods, Autocuts and OptCuts, addressed this task via energy-minimization approaches, they fail to produce semantic seam styles, an essential factor for professional artists. The recent emergence of Graph Neural Networks (GNNs), and the fact that a mesh can be represented as a particular form of a graph, has opened a new bridge to novel graph learning-based solutions in the computer graphics domain. In this work, we use the power of supervised GNNs for the first time to propose a fully automated UV mapping framework that enables users to replicate their desired seam styles while reducing distortion and seam length. To this end, we provide augmentation and decimation tools to enable artists to create their dataset and train the network to produce their desired seam style. We provide a complementary post-processing approach for reducing the distortion based on graph algorithms to refine low-confidence seam predictions and reduce seam length (or the number of shells in our supervised case) using a skeletonization method.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".