MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400582092 · doi:10.1145/3641519.3657494

TexPainter: Generative Mesh Texturing with Multi-view Consistency

2024· article· en· W4400582092 on OpenAlexaff
Hongkun Zhang, Zherong Pan, Congyi Zhang, Lifeng Zhu, Xifeng Gao

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceGenerative grammarConsistency (knowledge bases)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recent success of pre-trained diffusion models unlocks the possibility of the automatic generation of textures for arbitrary 3D meshes in the wild. However, these models are trained in the screen space, while converting them to a multi-view consistent texture image poses a major obstacle to the output quality. In this paper, we propose a novel method to enforce multi-view consistency. Our method is based on the observation that latent space in a pre-trained diffusion model is noised separately for each camera view, making it difficult to achieve multi-view consistency by directly manipulating the latent codes. Based on the celebrated Denoising Diffusion Implicit Models (DDIM) scheme, we propose to use an optimization-based color-fusion to enforce consistency and indirectly modify the latent codes by gradient back-propagation. Our method further relaxes the sequential dependency assumption among the camera views. By evaluating on a series of general 3D models, we find our simple approach improves consistency and overall quality of the generated textures as compared to competing state-of-the-arts. Our implementation is available at: https://github.com/Quantuman134/TexPainter

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)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.274 · 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
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

Citations15
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207