MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413243979 · doi:10.1145/3747862

Real-Time Triangle-SDF Continuous Collision Detection 49

2025· article· en· W4413243979 on OpenAlexafffund
Joël Pelletier-Guénette, Alexandre Mercier-Aubin, Sheldon Andrews

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ACM on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCollision detectionCollisionRobustness (evolution)Polygon meshComputer scienceAlgorithmIsosurfaceMathematicsMathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceComputer graphics (images)Visualization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce an efficient solution to the problem of continuous collision detection (CCD) between triangle geometry and signed distance fields (SDFs). We formulate the triangle-SDF collision problem as a novel spatio-temporal local optimization that solves for the first time of impact between a triangle and an SDF isosurface. Our method offers improved robustness over point sampling methods, and outperforms recent triangle-SDF discrete collision detection (DCD) algorithms. Furthermore, a novel method for adaptively refining the potential collision points on large triangles is proposed for robust triangle-SDF collision detection with coarse meshes. This enables the use of reduced geometry for efficient simulations. We demonstrate the benefits of our approach by comparing to state-of-the-art algorithms for triangle-SDF collision detection, and showcase its effectiveness through simulations involving complex collision scenarios.

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)0.005
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ACM on Computer Graphics and Interactive TechniquesSame topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207