MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417125258 · doi:10.1145/3757377.3763847

Solid-Shell Labeling for Discrete Surfaces

2025· article· W4417125258 on OpenAlexaff
Siqi Wang, Janos Meny, Izak Grguric, Mehdi Rahimzadeh, Denis Zorin, Daniele Panozzo, Hsueh‐Ti Derek Liu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsBC Innovation Council
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPolygon meshOffset (computer science)Surface (topology)Geometry processingThresholdingVolume meshShell (structure)Volume (thermodynamics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artist-created meshes in-the-wild often do not have a well defined interior. We observe that they typically consist of a mix of solid elements, faces that bound a volume, and shell elements that represent the medial surface of a thin shell. The lack of a well-defined interior prevents downstream applications, such as solid-modeling, simulation, and manufacturing. We present a method that takes as input a surface mesh and assigns to each face a label determining whether it belongs to a solid or shell. These labels reduce ambiguity by defining the interior for solid faces through thresholding the generalized winding number field, and for shell faces as the volume within an offset. We cast the labeling problem as an optimization that outputs a solid/shell label for each face, guided by a sparse set of user inputs. Once labeling is complete, we show how the shape can be volume meshed by passing the shell faces through an offset mesher and the solid faces to an off-the-shelf tetrahedral mesher, producing a final volumetric mesh by taking their union. Experiments on diverse meshes with defects and multiple solid and shell components demonstrate that our approach delivers the desired labels, enabling modeling and simulation on wild meshes in a way that respects the user intent.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.004

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topic3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207