Progressive Simulation for Cloth Quasistatics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The trade-off between speed and fidelity in cloth simulation is a fundamental computational problem in computer graphics and computational design. Coarse cloth models provide the interactive performance required by designers, but they can not be simulated at higher resolutions ("up-resed") without introducing simulation artifacts and/or unpredicted outcomes, such as different folds, wrinkles and drapes. But how can a coarse simulation predict the result of an unconstrained, high-resolution simulation that has not yet been run? We propose Progressive Cloth Simulation (PCS), a new forward simulation method for efficient preview of cloth quasistatics on exceedingly coarse triangle meshes with consistent and progressive improvement over a hierarchy of increasingly higher-resolution models. PCS provides an efficient coarse previewing simulation method that predicts the coarse-scale folds and wrinkles that will be generated by a corresponding converged, high-fidelity C-IPC simulation of the cloth drape's equilibrium. For each preview PCS can generate an increasing-resolution sequence of consistent models that progress towards this converged solution. This successive improvement can then be interrupted at any point, for example, whenever design parameters are updated. PCS then ensures feasibility at all resolutions, so that predicted solutions remain intersection-free and capture the complex folding and buckling behaviors of frictionally contacting cloth.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".