MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403498095 · doi:10.1111/cgf.15184

Generalized eXtended Finite Element Method for Deformable Cutting via Boolean Operations

2024· article· en· W4403498095 on OpenAlexafffund
Quoc-Minh Ton-That, Paul G. Kry, Sheldon Andrews

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Graphics Forum · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Numerical Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceFinite element methodElement (criminal law)Computer graphics (images)Theoretical computer scienceAlgorithmStructural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Traditional mesh‐based methods for cutting deformable bodies rely on modifying the simulation mesh by deleting, duplicating, deforming or subdividing its elements. Unfortunately, such topological changes eventually lead to instability, reduced accuracy, or computational efficiency challenges. Hence, state of the art algorithms favor the extended finite element method (XFEM), which decouples the cut geometry from the simulation mesh, allowing for stable and accurate cuts at an additional computational cost that is local to the cut region. However, in the 3‐dimensional setting, current XFEM frameworks are limited by the cutting configurations that they support. In particular, intersecting cuts are either prohibited or require sophisticated special treatment. Our work presents a general XFEM formulation that is applicable to the 1‐, 2‐, and 3‐dimensional setting without sacrificing the desirable properties of the method. In particular, we propose a generalized enrichment which supports multiple intersecting cuts of various degrees of non‐linearity by leveraging recent advances in robust mesh‐Boolean technology. This novel strategy additionally enables analytic discontinuous integration schemes required to compute mass, force and elastic energy. We highlight the simplicity, expressivity and accuracy of our XFEM implementation across various scenarios in which intersecting cutting patterns are featured.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.286
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
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Graphics ForumSame topicAdvanced Numerical Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207