MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400819112 · doi:10.1145/3658129

BrepGen: A B-rep Generative Diffusion Model with Structured Latent Geometry

2024· article· en· W4400819112 on OpenAlexaff
Xiang Xu, Joseph G. Lambourne, Pradeep Kumar Jayaraman, Zhengqing Wang, Karl D. D. Willis, Yasutaka Furukawa

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsAutodesk (Canada)Simon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenerative grammarGeometryDiffusionComputer scienceMathematicsPhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents BrepGen , a diffusion-based generative approach that directly outputs a Boundary representation (B-rep) Computer-Aided Design (CAD) model. BrepGen represents a B-rep model as a novel structured latent geometry in a hierarchical tree. With the root node representing a whole CAD solid, each element of a B-rep model (i.e., a face, an edge, or a vertex) progressively turns into a child-node from top to bottom. B-rep geometry information goes into the nodes as the global bounding box of each primitive along with a latent code describing the local geometric shape. The B-rep topology information is implicitly represented by node duplication. When two faces share an edge, the edge curve will appear twice in the tree, and a T-junction vertex with three incident edges appears six times in the tree with identical node features. Starting from the root and progressing to the leaf, BrepGen employs Transformer-based diffusion models to sequentially denoise node features while duplicated nodes are detected and merged, recovering the B-Rep topology information. Extensive experiments show that BrepGen advances the task of CAD B-rep generation, surpassing existing methods on various benchmarks. Results on our newly collected furniture dataset further showcase its exceptional capability in generating complicated geometry. While previous methods were limited to generating simple prismatic shapes, BrepGen incorporates free-form and doubly-curved surfaces for the first time. Additional applications of BrepGen include CAD autocomplete and design interpolation. The code, pretrained models, and dataset are available at https://github.com/samxuxiang/BrepGen.

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)0.004
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.005

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations42
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topic3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207