MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4328028319 · doi:10.1111/cgf.14625

Surface‐Only Dynamic Deformables using a Boundary Element Method

2022· article· en· W4328028319 on OpenAlexaff
Ryusuke Sugimoto, Christopher Batty, Toshiya Hachisuka

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Graphics Forum · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoundary element methodComputer scienceAnimationSimple (philosophy)Linear elasticitySurface (topology)Elasticity (physics)Constraint (computer-aided design)Element (criminal law)Displacement (psychology)Boundary (topology)AlgorithmFinite element methodComputer graphics (images)GeometryMathematicsStructural engineeringMathematical analysisPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We propose a novel surface‐only method for simulating dynamic deformables without the need for volumetric meshing or volumetric integral evaluations. While based upon a boundary element method (BEM)for linear elastodynamics, our method goes beyond simple adoption of BEM by addressing several of its key limitations. We alleviate large displacement artifacts due to linear elasticity by extending BEM with a moving reference frame and surface‐only fictitious forces, so that it only needs to handle deformations. To reduce memory and computational costs, we present a simple and practical method to compress the series of dense matrices required to simulate propagation of elastic waves over time. Furthermore, we explore a constraint enforcement mechanism and demonstrate the applicability of our method to general computer animation problems, such as frictional contact.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
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 venueComputer Graphics ForumSame topic3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207