Photo-inspired model-driven 3D object modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We introduce an algorithm for 3D object modeling where the user draws creative inspiration from an object captured in a single photograph. Our method leverages the rich source of photographs for creative 3D modeling. However, with only a photo as a guide, creating a 3D model from scratch is a daunting task. We support the modeling process by utilizing an available set of 3D candidate models. Specifically, the user creates a digital 3D model as a geometric variation from a 3D candidate. Our modeling technique consists of two major steps. The first step is a user-guided image-space object segmentation to reveal the structure of the photographed object. The core step is the second one, in which a 3D candidate is automatically deformed to fit the photographed target under the guidance of silhouette correspondence. The set of candidate models have been pre-analyzed to possess useful high-level structural information, which is heavily utilized in both steps to compensate for the ill-posedness of the analysis and modeling problems based only on content in a single image. Equally important, the structural information is preserved by the geometric variation so that the final product is coherent with its inherited structural information readily usable for subsequent model refinement or processing.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".