MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385272066 · doi:10.1145/3592403

Surface Simplification using Intrinsic Error Metrics

2023· article· en· W4385272066 on OpenAlexafffund
Hsueh‐Ti Derek Liu, Mark N. Gillespie, Benjamin Chislett, Nicholas Sharp, Alec Jacobson, Keenan Crane

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsGeodesicPolygon meshMathematicsTangent vectorAlgorithmSurface (topology)CurvatureComputer scienceApplied mathematicsGeometryTangent

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a method for fast simplification of surface meshes. Whereas past methods focus on visual appearance, our goal is to solve equations on the surface. Hence, rather than approximate the extrinsic geometry, we construct a coarse intrinsic triangulation of the input domain. In the spirit of the quadric error metric (QEM) , we perform greedy decimation while agglomerating global information about approximation error. In lieu of extrinsic quadrics, however, we store intrinsic tangent vectors that track how far curvature "drifts" during simplification. This process also yields a bijective map between the fine and coarse mesh, and prolongation operators for both scalar- and vector-valued data. Moreover, we obtain hard guarantees on element quality via intrinsic retriangulation---a feature unique to the intrinsic setting. The overall payoff is a "black box" approach to geometry processing, which decouples mesh resolution from the size of matrices used to solve equations. We show how our method benefits several fundamental tasks, including geometric multigrid, all-pairs geodesic distance, mean curvature flow, geodesic Voronoi diagrams, and the discrete exponential map.

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)0.007
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations22
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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