MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311806010 · doi:10.1145/3550454.3555472

Neural Brushstroke Engine

2022· article· en· W4311806010 on OpenAlexaff
Maria Shugrina, Chin-Ying Li, Sanja Fidler

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsVector InstituteUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSpace (punctuation)Artificial intelligenceInterpolation (computer graphics)EmbeddingComputer graphics (images)Set (abstract data type)PaintingGenerative modelComputer visionGenerative grammarVisual artsImage (mathematics)Art

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose Neural Brushstroke Engine, the first method to apply deep generative models to learn a distribution of interactive drawing tools. Our conditional GAN model learns the latent space of drawing styles from a small set (about 200) of unlabeled images in different media. Once trained, a single model can texturize stroke patches drawn by the artist, emulating a diverse collection of brush styles in the latent space. In order to enable interactive painting on a canvas of arbitrary size, we design a painting engine able to support real-time seamless patch-based generation, while allowing artists direct control of stroke shape, color and thickness. We show that the latent space learned by our model generalizes to unseen drawing and more experimental styles (e.g. beads) by embedding real styles into the latent space. We explore other applications of the continuous latent space, such as optimizing brushes to enable painting in the style of an existing artwork, automatic line drawing stylization, brush interpolation, and even natural language search over a continuous space of drawing tools. Our prototype received positive feedback from a small group of digital artists.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.004

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207