MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385767859 · doi:10.24963/ijcai.2023/200

CADParser: A Learning Approach of Sequence Modeling for B-Rep CAD

2023· article· en· W4385767859 on OpenAlexaff
Shengdi Zhou, Tianyi Tang, Bin Zhou

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersBeijing Science and Technology Planning ProjectNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCADWorkflowComputer scienceEngineering drawingJSONComputer Aided DesignSolid modelingDatabaseArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Computer-Aided Design (CAD) plays a crucial role in industrial manufacturing by providing geometry information and the construction workflow for manufactured objects. The construction information enables effective re-editing of parametric CAD models. While boundary representation (B-Rep) is the standard format for representing geometry structures, JSON format is an alternative due to the lack of uniform criteria for storing the construction workflow. Regrettably, most CAD models available on the Internet only offer geometry information, omitting the construction procedure and hampering creation efficiency. This paper proposes a learning approach CADParser to infer the underlying modeling sequences given a B-Rep CAD model. It achieves this by treating the CAD geometry structure as a graph and the construction workflow as a sequence. Since the existing CAD dataset only contains two operations (i.e., Sketch and Extrusion), limiting the diversity of the CAD model creation, we also introduce a large-scale dataset incorporating a more comprehensive range of operations such as Revolution, Fillet, and Chamfer. Each model includes both the geometry structure and the construction sequences. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our method can compete with the existing state-of-the-art methods quantitatively and qualitatively. Data is available at https://drive.google.com/CADParserData.

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 score0.728
Threshold uncertainty score0.325

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topic3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207