OptCtrlPoints: Finding the Optimal Control Points for Biharmonic 3D Shape Deformation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We propose O pt C trl P oints , a data‐driven framework designed to identify the optimal sparse set of control points for reproducing target shapes using biharmonic 3D shape deformation. Control‐point‐based 3D deformation methods are widely utilized for interactive shape editing, and their usability is enhanced when the control points are sparse yet strategically distributed across the shape. With this objective in mind, we introduce a data‐driven approach that can determine the most suitable set of control points, assuming that we have a given set of possible shape variations. The challenges associated with this task primarily stem from the computationally demanding nature of the problem. Two main factors contribute to this complexity: solving a large linear system for the biharmonic weight computation and addressing the combinatorial problem of finding the optimal subset of mesh vertices. To overcome these challenges, we propose a reformulation of the biharmonic computation that reduces the matrix size, making it dependent on the number of control points rather than the number of vertices. Additionally, we present an efficient search algorithm that significantly reduces the time complexity while still delivering a nearly optimal solution. Experiments on SMPL, SMAL, and DeformingThings4D datasets demonstrate the efficacy of our method. Our control points achieve better template‐to‐target fit than FPS, random search, and neural‐network‐based prediction. We also highlight the significant reduction in computation time from days to approximately 3 minutes.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it