Exploration of continuous variability in collections of 3D shapes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As large public repositories of 3D shapes continue to grow, the amount of shape variability in such collections also increases, both in terms of the number of different classes of shapes, as well as the geometric variability of shapes within each class. While this gives users more choice for shape selection, it can be difficult to explore large collections and understand the range of variations amongst the shapes. Exploration is particularly challenging for public shape repositories, which are often only loosely tagged and contain neither point-based nor part-based correspondences. In this paper, we present a method for discovering and exploring continuous variability in a collection of 3D shapes without correspondences. Our method is based on a novel navigation interface that allows users to explore a collection of related shapes by deforming a base template shape through a set of intuitive deformation controls. We also help the user to select the most meaningful deformations using a novel technique for learning shape variability in terms of deformations of the template. Our technique assumes that the set of shapes lies near a low-dimensional manifold in a certain descriptor space, which allows us to avoid establishing correspondences between shapes, while being rotation and scaling invariant. We present results on several shape collections taken directly from public repositories.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it