MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7092537232 · doi:10.2312/pg.20251297

Motion Vector-Based Frame Generation for Real-Time Rendering

2025· article· W7092537232 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueEurographics · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & TechnologySAIT Polytechnic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMotion interpolationRendering (computer graphics)Optical flowFrame rateMotion estimationInterpolation (computer graphics)3D renderingReal-time renderingMotion (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The demand for high frame rate rendering is rapidly increasing, especially in the graphics and gaming industries. Although recent learning-based frame interpolation methods have demonstrated promising results, they have not yet achieved the quality required for real-time gaming. High-quality frame interpolation is critical for rendering faster, dynamic motion during gameplay. In graphics, motion vectors are typically favored over optical flow due to their accuracy and efficiency in game engines. However, motion vectors alone are insufficient for frame interpolation, as they lack bilateral motions for the target frame to interpolate and struggle with capturing non-geometric movements. To address this, we propose a novel method that leverages fast, low-cost motion vectors as guiding flows, integrating them into a task-specific intermediate flow estimation process. Our approach employs a combined motion and image context encoder-decoder to produce more accurate intermediate bilateral flows. As a result, our method significantly improves interpolation quality and achieves state-of-the-art performance in rendered content.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEurographicsSame topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207