MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183534396 · doi:10.1145/3450626.3459772

The shape matching element method

2021· article· en· W3183534396 on OpenAlexafffund
Ty Trusty, Honglin Chen, David I. W. Levin

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersConnaught FundCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsFeature (linguistics)AnimationComputer scienceMatching (statistics)Element (criminal law)Variety (cybernetics)Finite element methodAlgorithmGeometryArtificial intelligenceComputer graphics (images)MathematicsEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce a new method for direct physics-based animation of volumetric curved models, represented using NURBS surfaces. Our technical contribution is the Shape Matching Element Method (SEM). SEM is a completely meshless algorithm, the first to simultaneously be robust to gaps and overlaps in geometry, be compatible with standard constitutive models and time integration schemes, support contact and frictional interactions and to preserve feature correspondence during simulation which enables editable simulated output. We demonstrate the efficacy of our algorithm by producing compelling physics-based animations from a variety of curved input models.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.355

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.246 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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