Computational Smocking through Fabric‐Thread Interaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We formalize Italian smocking, an intricate embroidery technique that gathers flat fabric into pleats along meandering lines of stitches, resulting in pleats that fold and gather where the stitching veers. In contrast to English smocking, characterized by colorful stitches decorating uniformly shaped pleats, and Canadian smocking, which uses localized knots to form voluminous pleats, Italian smocking permits the fabric to move freely along the stitched threads following curved paths, resulting in complex and unpredictable pleats with highly diverse, irregular structures, achieved simply by pulling on the threads. We introduce a novel method for digital previewing of Italian smocking results, given the thread stitching path as input. Our method uses a coarse‐grained mass‐spring system to simulate the interaction between the threads and the fabric. This configuration guides the fine‐level fabric deformation through an adaptation of the state‐of‐the‐art simulator, C‐IPC [LKJ21]. Our method models the general problem of fabric‐thread interaction and can be readily adapted to preview Canadian smocking as well. We compare our results to baseline approaches and physical fabrications to demonstrate the accuracy of our method.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".