MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215295353 · doi:10.1145/3478513.3480529

Keypoint-driven line drawing vectorization via PolyVector flow

2021· article· en· W3215295353 on OpenAlexafffund
Ivan Puhachov, William Neveu, Edward Chien, Mikhail Bessmeltsev

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsVectorization (mathematics)Computer scienceRaster graphicsComputer graphics (images)Spurious relationshipAnimationSet (abstract data type)Line (geometry)Topology (electrical circuits)Geometric primitiveFlow (mathematics)Task (project management)Geometry processingDigital geometryComputational geometryGeometryAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceImage processingMathematicsImage (mathematics)Digital imageParallel computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Line drawing vectorization is a daily task in graphic design, computer animation, and engineering, necessary to convert raster images to a set of curves for editing and geometry processing. Despite recent progress in the area, automatic vectorization tools often produce spurious branches or incorrect connectivity around curve junctions; or smooth out sharp corners. These issues detract from the use of such vectorization tools, both from an aesthetic viewpoint and for feasibility of downstream applications (e.g., automatic coloring or inbetweening). We address these problems by introducing a novel line drawing vectorization algorithm that splits the task into three components: (1) finding keypoints, i.e., curve endpoints, junctions, and sharp corners; (2) extracting drawing topology, i.e., finding connections between keypoints; and (3) computing the geometry of those connections. We compute the optimal geometry of the connecting curves via a novel geometric flow --- PolyVector Flow --- that aligns the curves to the drawing, disambiguating directions around Y-, X-, and T-junctions. We show that our system robustly infers both the geometry and topology of detailed complex drawings. We validate our system both quantitatively and qualitatively, demonstrating that our method visually outperforms previous work.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.004

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations25
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207