MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3185376398 · doi:10.1145/3450626.3459818

Fusion 360 gallery

2021· article· en· W3185376398 on OpenAlexaff
Karl D. D. Willis, Yewen Pu, Jieliang Luo, Hang Chu, Tao Du, Joseph G. Lambourne, Armando Solar-Lezama, Wojciech Matusik

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsAutodesk (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCADComputer scienceSketchComputer Aided DesignTask (project management)Parametric statisticsSoftwareProcess (computing)Parametric modelEngineering drawingArtificial intelligenceSoftware engineeringProgramming languageHuman–computer interactionAlgorithmSystems engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parametric computer-aided design (CAD) is a standard paradigm used to design manufactured objects, where a 3D shape is represented as a program supported by the CAD software. Despite the pervasiveness of parametric CAD and a growing interest from the research community, currently there does not exist a dataset of realistic CAD models in a concise programmatic form. In this paper we present the Fusion 360 Gallery , consisting of a simple language with just the sketch and extrude modeling operations, and a dataset of 8,625 human design sequences expressed in this language. We also present an interactive environment called the Fusion 360 Gym , which exposes the sequential construction of a CAD program as a Markov decision process, making it amendable to machine learning approaches. As a use case for our dataset and environment, we define the CAD reconstruction task of recovering a CAD program from a target geometry. We report results of applying state-of-the-art methods of program synthesis with neurally guided search on this task.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.140

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.038

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.198 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations154
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207