ASMR: Adaptive Skeleton‐Mesh Rigging and Skinning via 2D Generative Prior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Despite the growing accessibility of skeletal motion data, integrating it for animating character meshes remains challenging due to diverse configurations of both skeletons and meshes. Specifically, the body scale and bone lengths of the skeleton should be adjusted in accordance with the size and proportions of the mesh, ensuring that all joints are accurately positioned within the character mesh. Furthermore, defining skinning weights is complicated by variations in skeletal configurations, such as the number of joints and their hierarchy, as well as differences in mesh configurations, including their connectivity and shapes. While existing approaches have made efforts to automate this process, they hardly address the variations in both skeletal and mesh configurations. In this paper, we present a novel method for the automatic rigging and skinning of character meshes using skeletal motion data, accommodating arbitrary configurations of both meshes and skeletons. The proposed method predicts the optimal skeleton aligned with the size and proportion of the mesh as well as defines skinning weights for various meshskeleton configurations, without requiring explicit supervision tailored to each of them. By incorporating Diffusion 3D Features (Diff3F) as semantic descriptors of character meshes, our method achieves robust generalization across different configurations. To assess the performance ofour method in comparison to existing approaches, we conducted comprehensive evaluations encompassing both quantitative and qualitative analyses, specifically examining the predicted skeletons, skinning weights, and deformation quality.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".