MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396555758 · doi:10.1145/3662181

IMESH: A DSL for Mesh Processing

2024· article· en· W4396555758 on OpenAlexaff
Yong Li, Shoaib Kamil, Keenan Crane, Alec Jacobson, Yotam Gingold

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigital subscriber lineComputer scienceComputer graphics (images)Computational scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mesh processing algorithms are often communicated via concise mathematical notation (e.g., summation over mesh neighborhoods). However, conversion of notation into working code remains a time-consuming and error-prone process, which requires arcane knowledge of low-level data structures and libraries—impeding rapid exploration of high-level algorithms. We address this problem by introducing a domain-specific language (DSL) for mesh processing called I MESH, which resembles notation commonly used in visual and geometric computing and automates the process of converting notation into code. The centerpiece of our language is a flexible notation for specifying and manipulating neighborhoods of a cell complex, internally represented via standard operations on sparse boundary matrices. This layered design enables natural expression of algorithms while minimizing demands on a code generation backend. In particular, by integrating I MESH with the linear algebra features of the I LA DSL and adding support for automatic differentiation, we can rapidly implement a rich variety of algorithms on point clouds, surface meshes, and volume meshes.

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)0.003
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0060.005
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.015

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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