Differentiable Depth for Real2Sim Calibration of Soft Body Simulations
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
Abstract In this work, we present a novel approach for calibrating material model parameters for soft body simulations using real data. We use a fully differentiable pipeline, combining a differentiable soft body simulator and differentiable depth rendering, which permits fast gradient‐based optimizations. Our method requires no data pre‐processing, and minimal experimental set‐up, as we directly minimize the L2‐norm between raw LIDAR scans and rendered simulation states. In essence, we provide the first marker‐free approach for calibrating a soft‐body simulator to match observed real‐world deformations. Our approach is inexpensive as it solely requires a consumer‐level LIDAR sensor compared to acquiring a professional marker‐based motion capture system. We investigate the effects of different material parameterizations and evaluate convergence for parameter optimization in both single and multi‐material scenarios of varying complexity. Finally, we show that our set‐up can be extended to optimize for dynamic behaviour as well.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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