MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111550654 · doi:10.1109/aivr50618.2020.00026

MoveBox: Democratizing MoCap for the Microsoft Rocketbox Avatar Library

2020· article· en· W3111550654 on OpenAlexaff
Mar González-Franco, Zelia Egan, Matthew Peachey, Angus Antley, Tanmay Randhavane, Payod Panda, Yaying Zhang, Cheng Yao Wang, Derek Reilly, Tabitha C. Peck, Andrea Stevenson Won, Anthony Steed, Eyal Ofek

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman Motion and Animation
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAvatarMotion captureToolboxAnimationsyncComputer graphics (images)RGB color modelMotion (physics)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents MoveBox an open sourced toolbox for animating motion captured (MoCap) movements onto the Microsoft Rocketbox library of avatars. Motion capture is performed using a single depth sensor, such as Azure Kinect or Windows Kinect V2. Motion capture is performed in real-time using a single depth sensor, such as Azure Kinect or Windows Kinect V2, or extracted from existing RGB videos offline leveraging deep-learning computer vision techniques. Our toolbox enables real-time animation of the user's avatar by converting the transformations between systems that have different joints and hierarchies. Additional features of the toolbox include recording, playback and looping animations, as well as basic audio lip sync, blinking and resizing of avatars as well as finger and hand animations. Our main contribution is both in the creation of this open source tool as well as the validation on different devices and discussion of MoveBox's capabilities by end users.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0560.025

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.161 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations28
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Motion and AnimationFrench-language works237,207