MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7017312375

Automatic 3-D triangulations of complex geometries from a coarse hexahedral mesh

2007· article· en· W7017312375 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAcceda (Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria) · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHexahedronTetrahedronCube (algebra)Boundary (topology)Mesh generationGenerator (circuit theory)Domain (mathematical analysis)Topology (electrical circuits)Polygon mesh
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces a new automatic tetrahedral mesh generator on the adaptive finite
\nelement ALBERTA code. The procedure can be applied to 3-D domains with boundary surfaces which
\nare projectable on faces of a cube. The generalization of the mesh generator for complex domains which
\ncan be split into cubes or hexahedra is straightforward. The domain surfaces must be given as analytical
\nor discrete functions. Although we have worked with orthogonal and radial projections, any other oneto-
\none projection may be considered. The mesh generator starts from a coarse tetrahedral mesh which is
\nautomatically obtained by the subdivision of each cube into six tetrahedra. The main idea is to construct a sequence of nested meshes by refining only the tetrahedra which have a face on the cube projection faces. The virtual projection of external faces defines a triangulation on the domain boundary. The 3-D local refinement is carried out such that the approximation of domain boundary surfaces verifies a given precision: Once this objective is reached, those nodes placed on the cube faces are projected on their corresponding true boundary surfaces, and inner nodes are relocated using a linear mapping. As the mesh topology is kept during node movement, poor quality or even inverted elements could appear in the resulting mesh. For this reason, a mesh optimization procedure must be applied. The efficiency of the proposed technique is shown with several applications. On the other hand, authors are grateful for Spanish Government and FEDER support, grant contracts: CGL2004-0617l-C03-03/CLl and CGL2004-06171-C03-02/CL1.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.616
Threshold uncertainty score0.861

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcceda (Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria)Same topicComputational Geometry and Mesh GenerationFrench-language works237,207