CarveNet: Carving Point-Block for Complex 3D Shape Completion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
3D point cloud completion is very challenging because it relies on accurately understanding the complex 3D shapes (e.g., high-curvature, concave/convex, and hollowed-out 3D shapes) and the unknown & diverse patterns of the partially available point clouds. In this paper, we propose a novel solution, i.e.,Point-block Carving(PC), for completing the complex 3D point cloud completion. Given the partial point cloud as the guidance, we carve a 3D block that contains the uniformly distributed 3D points, yielding the entire point cloud. We propose a new network architecture to achieve PC, i.e.,CarveNet. This network conducts the exclusive convolution on each block point, where the convolutional kernels are trained on the 3D shape data. CarveNet determines which point should be carved to recover the complete shapes' details effectively. Furthermore, we propose a sensor-aware method for data augmentation, i.e.,SensorAug, for training CarveNet on richer patterns of partial point clouds, thus enhancing the completion power of the network. The extensive evaluations on the ShapeNet, ShapNet-55/34 and KITTI datasets demonstrate the generality of our approach on the partial point clouds with diverse patterns. On these datasets, CarveNet successfully outperforms the state-of-the-art methods.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".