MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385271041 · doi:10.1145/3592399

Computational Exploration of Multistable Elastic Knots

2023· article· en· W4385271041 on OpenAlexafffund
Michele Vidulis, Y.J. Ren, Julian Panetta, Eitan Grinspun, Mark V. Pauly

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
KeywordsKnot (papermaking)Knot theoryComputer scienceAlgorithmTheoretical computer scienceStatistical physicsMathematicsPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an algorithmic approach to discover, study, and design multistable elastic knots. Elastic knots are physical realizations of closed curves embedded in 3-space. When endowed with the material thickness and bending resistance of a physical wire, these knots settle into equilibrium states that balance the forces induced by elastic deformation and self-contacts of the wire. In general, elastic knots can have many distinct equilibrium states, i.e. they are multistable mechanical systems. We propose a computational pipeline that combines randomized spatial sampling and physics simulation to efficiently find stable equilibrium states of elastic knots. Leveraging results from knot theory, we run our pipeline on thousands of different topological knot types to create an extensive data set of multistable knots. By applying a series of filters to this data, we discover new transformable knots with interesting geometric and physical properties. A further analysis across knot types reveals geometric and topological patterns, yielding constructive principles that generalize beyond the currently tabulated knot types. We show how multistable elastic knots can be used to design novel deployable structures and engaging recreational puzzles. Several physical prototypes at different scales highlight these applications and validate our simulation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topic3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207