Preserving the autocovariance of texture tilings using importance sampling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract By‐example aperiodic tilings are popular texture synthesis techniques that allow a fast, on‐the‐fly generation of unbounded and non‐periodic textures with an appearance matching an arbitrary input sample called the “exemplar”. But by relying on uniform random sampling, these algorithms fail to preserve the autocovariance function, resulting in correlations that do not match the ones in the exemplar. The output can then be perceived as excessively random. In this work, we present a new method which can well preserve the autocovariance function of the exemplar. It consists in fetching contents with an importance sampler taking the explicit autocovariance function as the probability density function (pdf) of the sampler. Our method can be controlled for increasing or decreasing the randomness aspect of the texture. Besides significantly improving synthesis quality for classes of textures characterized by pronounced autocovariance functions, we moreover propose a real‐time tiling and blending scheme that permits the generation of high‐quality textures faster than former algorithms with minimal downsides by reducing the number of texture fetches.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".