Neural dual contouring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We introduce neural dual contouring (NDC), a new data-driven approach to mesh reconstruction based on dual contouring (DC). Like traditional DC, it produces exactly one vertex per grid cell and one quad for each grid edge intersection, a natural and efficient structure for reproducing sharp features. However, rather than computing vertex locations and edge crossings with hand-crafted functions that depend directly on difficult-to-obtain surface gradients, NDC uses a neural network to predict them. As a result, NDC can be trained to produce meshes from signed or unsigned distance fields, binary voxel grids, or point clouds (with or without normals); and it can produce open surfaces in cases where the input represents a sheet or partial surface. During experiments with five prominent datasets, we find that NDC, when trained on one of the datasets, generalizes well to the others. Furthermore, NDC provides better surface reconstruction accuracy, feature preservation, output complexity, triangle quality, and inference time in comparison to previous learned (e.g., neural marching cubes, convolutional occupancy networks) and traditional (e.g., Poisson) methods. Code and data are available at https://github.com/czq142857/NDC.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".