MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319301137 · doi:10.1109/wacv56688.2023.00128

Seg&Struct: The Interplay Between Part Segmentation and Structure Inference for 3D Shape Parsing

2023· article· en· W4319301137 on OpenAlexaff
Jeonghyun Kim, Kaichun Mo, Minhyuk Sung, Woontack Woo

Bibliographic record

Venue2023 IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInferenceSegmentationComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceParsingTask (project management)Machine learningPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose Seg&Struct, a supervised learning framework leveraging the interplay between part segmentation and structure inference and demonstrating their synergy in an integrated framework. Both part segmentation and structure inference have been extensively studied in the recent deep learning literature, while the supervisions used for each task have not been fully exploited to assist the other task. Namely, structure inference has been typically conducted with an autoencoder that does not lever-age the point-to-part associations. Also, segmentation has been mostly performed without structural priors that tell the plausibility of the output segments. We present how these two tasks can be best combined while fully utilizing super-vision to improve performance. Our framework first decomposes a raw input shape into part segments using an off-the-shelf algorithm, whose outputs are then mapped to nodes in a part hierarchy, establishing point-to-part associations. Following this, ours predicts the structural information, e.g., part bounding boxes and part relationships. Lastly, the segmentation is rectified by examining the confusion of part boundaries using the structure-based part features. Our experimental results based on the StructureNet and PartNet demonstrate that the interplay between two tasks results in remarkable improvements in both tasks: 27.91% in structure inference and 0.5% in segmentation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.005

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2023 IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV)Same topic3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207