MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4252599270 · doi:10.1111/cgf.12964

Near‐Isometric Level Set Tracking

2016· article· en· W4252599270 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Tao, Justin Solomon, Adrian Butscher

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Graphics Forum · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceIsometric exerciseSet (abstract data type)Tracking (education)Computer graphicsComputer visionAlgorithmDeformation (meteorology)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Implicit representations of geometry have found applications in shape modeling, simulation, and other graphics pipelines. These representations, however, do not provide information about the paths of individual points as shapes move and undergo deformation. For this reason, we reconsider the problem of tracking points on level set surfaces, with the goal of designing an algorithm that — unlike previous work — can recover rotational motion and nearly isometric deformation. We track points on level sets of a time‐varying function using approximate Killing vector fields (AKVFs), the velocity fields of near‐isometric motions. To this end, we provide suitable theoretical and discrete constructions for computing AKVFs in a narrow band surrounding an animated level set surface. Furthermore, we propose time integrators well‐suited to integrating AKVFs in time to track points. We demonstrate the theoretical and practical advantages of our proposed algorithms on synthetic and practical tasks.

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)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.240 · 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
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

Citations11
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Graphics ForumSame topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207