Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 63 references

CRAFT: Designing Creative and Functional 3D Objects

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read ShapeCraft deforms a template mesh into a body-fitting, semantically aligned 3D object from text, image, or sketch.

desk verdict Useful joint-optimization system paper, but the text-guidance headline is under-supported by circular metrics and an unspecified contact-point input. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.03889 v2 pith:AOO6MZIP submitted 2024-12-05 cs.CV cs.GR

Michelle Guo , Mia Tang , Hannah Cha , Ruohan Zhang , C. Karen Liu , Jiajun Wu This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CVcs.GR
keywords body-aware3DgenerationmeshdeformationCLIPguidancecontactandpenetrationoptimizationtext-to-3Dimage-to-3DJacobianfieldsprinting
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper claims that a single joint optimization over per-triangle Jacobian deformations can make everyday 3D objects simultaneously match a text, image, or sketch prompt and fit a given body shape. It treats semantic alignment as CLIP embedding similarity of rendered views and body fit as contact plus penetration losses. If true, this gives a data-free design tool for glasses, hats, rings, shoes, and other wearables, adjustable to different bodies and fabricable by 3D printing. The method is demonstrated across categories and body shapes with both objective metrics and a user study.

What carries the argument

The central object is the per-triangle Jacobian field $J_i$ of the deformed mesh, optimized through a Poisson solve rather than raw vertex positions, following Neural Jacobian Fields. Semantic alignment is driven by CLIP cosine similarity between differentiable renders and the prompt or guidance-image embeddings, plus a patch-level feature regularizer for multi-view consistency. Body fit is driven by the contact loss $L_c(V, V_c) = \lambda_c \frac{1}{|V_c|} \sum_{v_c \in V_c} \min_{v \in V} \|v_c - v\|_2^2$ and the penetration loss $L_p = \sum_{d_i < D} d_i^2$, where $d_i$ are signed distances between the object and body mesh.

What would settle it

Run the optimizer with two different contact-vertex sets for the same object-body pair, one placed on the body region where the object should sit and one placed far away; if the final objects do not differ meaningfully or both fail to fit, the contact loss is not doing the claimed work. Alternatively, swap in randomly chosen contact vertices and measure contact distance and penetration against the paper's reported values.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

ShapeCraft's central claim is that optimizing per-face Jacobian matrices of a template mesh against a weighted sum of semantic and body-aware losses suffices to produce creative, functional objects rigged to a given body, without per-object datasets or manual artist intervention. Starting from one mesh per category, the optimizer deforms it toward text, image, or sketch guidance while holding selected body contact vertices close and keeping penetration below a threshold. The resulting meshes are watertight enough to simulate on virtual characters and to fabricate in the real world.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that someone already knows which body vertices the object should touch; the paper takes the contact-vertex set as an input and never explains how to pick it, so a wrong choice would pull the object to the wrong spot and the claimed fit would fail.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single template mesh per object category can be reshaped into many prompt-specified designs, such as a star ring, cat mask, or cow hat, rather than requiring a separate generative model per object.
  • Image guidance gives stronger semantic control than text guidance alone, while text guidance keeps the deformation fluid and requires no external 3D reference.
  • Joint optimization beats two-stage pipelines: refining a guidance mesh after the fact cannot fix wrong topology or overly thin structures, whereas starting from a template and optimizing both objectives can.
  • Generated objects can be 3D printed and worn or simulated on virtual characters, and the same prompt adapts to different body shapes, from adults to cartoon characters.
  • In the user study, the joint method scores highest on prompt alignment and aesthetics while maintaining comparable comfort to the untouched template mesh.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A natural extension the paper leaves implicit is to predict the contact-vertex set automatically from the prompt and body shape, since the current pipeline delegates that choice to the user.
  • If the contact weight $\lambda_c$ is swept upward, semantic creativity should shrink as the object is pulled harder onto the body; this trade-off curve is a testable extension of the paper's results.
  • Because the method inherits CLIP's text-image associations, designs may skew toward stereotyped renderings of prompts, and the sketch-guided path via image guidance is one way around that limitation.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents ShapeCraft, a mesh-deformation method that optimizes per-triangle Jacobian fields to deform a template object mesh into a body-aware, semantically aligned 3D object, guided by text, image, or sketch. The optimization combines CLIP-based semantic alignment losses (Eqs. 3 and 5) with contact and penetration losses (Eqs. 8–10) and a Jacobian regularizer. The authors show qualitative results across object categories and body shapes, a small quantitative comparison in Table 1, a user study in Table 2, and applications including 3D printing and sketch-guided design.

Significance. The core idea—jointly optimizing semantic alignment and body contact/penetration in a differentiable mesh-deformation framework—is timely and potentially useful for personalized object design. Strengths include the breadth of qualitative demonstrations, the use of a Jacobian-field parameterization, and the fabrication and sketch applications. However, the paper's claims are broader than the evidence: the main quantitative metrics coincide with the optimized losses, and the text-guidance modality is not quantitatively evaluated despite being a headline contribution.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4.3, Table 1] The reported metrics are the very objectives being optimized: CLIP cosine similarity is minimized in Eq. (3) for text guidance and in Eq. (5) for image guidance, Dp is derived from the signed distances penalized in Eq. (9), and Dc is a Chamfer-like distance over the same contact vertices used in Eq. (8). Consequently, the table cannot establish that ShapeCraft outperforms baselines on independent notions of semantic alignment or body fit. Please add independent metrics not used in the optimization, report variance or error bars, and give per-example counts.
  2. [§4.2 and Table 1] Fig. 8 states that text guidance "exhibits limited deformation on most examples (e.g., 'star ring')", yet Table 1 contains no Template+Text row and the user study in Table 2 does not separate text-conditioned from image-conditioned outputs. Because the abstract and introduction claim generation "from text, image, or sketch", the text modality needs its own quantitative evaluation, including failure cases; without it, the central claim is supported only by selected qualitative examples.
  3. [§3.2, Eq. (8)] The contact loss requires a set of contact vertices Vc, described in Fig. 4 as an input, but the paper never explains how Vc is obtained—whether manually annotated per example, derived automatically from the body mesh, or optimized. This matters because incorrect contact vertices will pull the object to wrong locations, and the claim of "no manual artist intervention" depends on this step being automatic. Please specify the procedure and, ideally, ablate sensitivity to Vc.
  4. [§4.3, Table 2] The user study uses only N=9 participants and reports means without variance, confidence intervals, or statistical tests. For a subjective comparison over methods, this is insufficient to support the claim that ShapeCraft is "most prompt aligned and aesthetic" while maintaining comfort. At minimum, report per-participant distributions and a paired significance test, or treat the user study as a pilot.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§3.2, Eqs. (8) and (10)] The weight λc appears both inside Lc in Eq. (8) and as a multiplier in Eq. (10), so the effective contact weight is λc^2; please clarify which definition is intended.
  2. [§4.3, Table 1] The caption of Table 1 does not define Dp and Dc; in particular Dc is called "chamfer distance of the contact points" but no formula or sampling details are given.
  3. [Figure 10] The caption and the first-row label ("NoWith") appear truncated; the penetration-map color scale is described but the displayed axes and legend are missing.
  4. [References] Reference [61] has garbled text ("Ergoboss: onomic ptimization of dy-upporting urfaces"); please fix the title and author formatting.
  5. [§4.1] The statement that different body shapes affect "creativity" is subjective; the supporting discussion is qualitative and would benefit from a quantitative measure of deformation or prompt alignment per body shape.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Table 1's quantitative metrics reduce to the optimized losses: CLIP is the negative of Eq. (3)/(5), Dp is Eq. (9), and Dc is Eq. (8), so the headline numbers are evaluations of the objective, not independent measurements.

  1. self definitional [Section 3.1, Eq. (3); Section 4.3, Table 1]
    "Ls(M) = 1/K sum_{k=1}^K -sim(CLIP(I_k), CLIP(P)). (3) ... Table 1. We report quantitative metrics on the prompt alignment, penetration, and chamfer distance of the contact points to the object vertices."

    The 'prompt alignment' metric CLIP up arrow reported in Table 1 is the negative of the exact loss Ls that gradient descent minimizes: maximizing the evaluation metric is the optimization objective itself. For image guidance, Eq. (5) minimizes the same cosine similarity against renders of the guidance mesh. Hence the high CLIP up arrow of Ours is not an independent measurement of semantic alignment; it is the training objective evaluated at convergence.

  2. self definitional [Section 3.2, Eqs. (8)-(9); Section 4.3, Table 1]
    "Lc(V, Vc) = lambda_c 1/|Vc| sum_{vc in Vc} min_{v in V} ||vc - v||_2^2, (8) ... Lp(M, Mb) = sum_{di < D} di^2, (9)"

    The Table 1 metrics Dp down arrow and Dc down arrow are, respectively, the penetration loss Lp and the one-sided contact Chamfer loss Lc that the body-aware objective Lb in Eq. (10) minimizes. Comparing 'with Lb Y' against 'without Lb' on these metrics therefore reports whether the optimizer lowered its own loss; the improvement is imposed by construction rather than measured against an external ground truth.

full rationale

The central quantitative evaluation is partially circular: Table 1's CLIP up arrow is the negative of Ls (Eq. 3/5), and Dp/Dc are exactly the body losses Lp/Lc (Eqs. 8-9) whose weighted sum is optimized. Thus the headline objective metrics report the values of the optimized losses, not independent predictions. External evidence prevents a higher score: the user study (N=9) rates prompt alignment, aesthetics, and comfort; the qualitative galleries and fabricated 3D-printed objects provide independent demonstrations. The paper itself concedes in Section 4.2 that text guidance 'exhibits limited deformation on most examples (e.g., "star ring")', and Table 1 contains no Template+Text row; this is a support gap in the central text-modality claim, not a circularity. The contact-vertex input Vc is also underspecified, but that is an unstated manual input rather than a self-referential reduction. The self-citation to [54] for the contact loss is not load-bearing because the loss is fully defined in Eqs. (8)-(10). Overall, the score of 6 reflects that some of the paper's claimed quantitative 'predictions' reduce by construction to the optimized objectives, while the method retains independent qualitative and user-study content.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The method depends on a set of hand-chosen loss weights and thresholds, and relies on CLIP, a differentiable renderer, and an external image-to-3D model as external supervision. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (6)
  • lambda_s (semantic loss weight)
    Hand-chosen weight balancing the semantic alignment loss in Eq. (11); no values or tuning procedure reported.
  • lambda_b (body loss weight)
    Hand-chosen weight balancing the body-aware loss in Eq. (12); no values reported.
  • alpha (Jacobian regularization weight)
    Hand-chosen strength of the identity-Jacobian regularizer in Eq. (13); no values reported.
  • lambda_c (contact loss weight)
    Tunable weight in the contact loss Eq. (8), described as 'tunable' in Section 3.2.
  • lambda_p (penetration loss weight)
    Tunable weight in the penetration loss Eq. (9), not reported.
  • D (penetration distance threshold)
    Threshold in Eq. (9) that defines when signed distances are penalized; no value reported.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption CLIP embeddings capture semantic similarity between text and rendered images of 3D objects.
    Invoked in Section 3.1, Eq. (3). If CLIP cannot distinguish the geometry of e.g. a 'star ring' from a generic ring, the semantic loss will not guide deformation effectively. The paper's own Figure 8 shows text guidance struggles on 'star ring'.
  • domain assumption The differentiable renderer provides reliable gradients for optimizing per-triangle Jacobians.
    Invoked in Section 3.1, Eq. (2). The optimization loop assumes gradients from rendered images through the Poisson solve are usable for mesh deformation.
  • domain assumption The template mesh topology is appropriate for the target object category.
    Invoked in Section 4.1: 'the topology within an object category are often shared across designs.' Figure 12 shows that when topology is wrong (guidance mesh missing a hole), the optimization cannot fix it.
  • domain assumption The image-to-3D model (Tripo) produces a guidance mesh that faithfully represents the input image.
    Invoked in Section 3.1: 'we use an image-to-3D model [1] to lift the image to a 3D guidance mesh.' If the guidance mesh is poor, the image-guided losses (CLIP similarity, Chamfer distance, L1) will be misaligned.
  • standard math The Poisson equation (Eq. 1) has a solution for any Jacobian field and yields a valid deformation map.
    Standard least-squares Poisson problem for deformation reconstruction; assumed without proof.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of CRAFT: Designing Creative and Functional 3D Objects." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AOO6MZIP

@misc{pith2026241203889,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: CRAFT: Designing Creative and Functional 3D Objects},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AOO6MZIP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.03889}
}
read the original abstract

For designing a wide range of everyday objects, the design process should be aware of both the human body and the underlying semantics of the design specification. However, these two objectives present significant challenges to the current AI-based designing tools. In this work, we present a method to synthesize body-aware 3D objects from a base mesh given an input body geometry and either text or image as guidance. The generated objects can be simulated on virtual characters, or fabricated for real-world use. We propose to use a mesh deformation procedure that optimizes for both semantic alignment as well as contact and penetration losses. Using our method, users can generate both virtual or real-world objects from text, image, or sketch, without the need for manual artist intervention. We present both qualitative and quantitative results on various object categories, demonstrating the effectiveness of our approach.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.03889 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. ShapeCraft generates 3D shapes given text as input. The objects are optimized to fit on various character body shapes. Abstract For designing a wide range of everyday objects, the de￾sign process should be aware of both the human body and the underlying semantics of the design specification. How￾ever, these two objectives present significant challenges to the current AI-based designing tools. In this work, we presen… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Our method can deform the same template mesh into different text-specified geometries that are body-fitting. day object categories, without relying on object datasets. We build a flexible system that jointly optimizes for multi￾ple objectives. We define semantically-aware design as the process of designing according to a text or visual concept. Personalized, body-aware design is generating a 3D shape that is well-fi… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Method overview. We synthesize body-aware 3D objects from a base mesh given an input body geometry and either text or image as guidance. We propose to use a mesh deformation procedure that optimizes for both semantic alignment as well as contact and penetration losses.…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: We show the effect of contact vs. penetration losses on text guided deformation for “cat mask”. 0 100 200 300 Final [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: With contact and penetration losses, the text-guided deformations are more body fitting. Ours Without [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: We visualize penetration maps on objects optimized with (second row) and without body losses (first row). In the pene￾tration maps, the blue regions indicate a positive distance between the mesh and the characters, signifying no penetration. Red re￾gions indicate a ne…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: We evaluate the effect of text vs. image guidance. Im￾age guidance produces stronger control, generating objects that are more prompt-aligned. We show the reference image in the bottom right corner of example of the image guidance row. In [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: We show the object mesh (first row) and the penetra￾tion map from a different viewpoint (second row). Even though we can apply a body refinement optimization on the guidance mesh to reduce the penetrations, it cannot the fix the thin structure on the object. Jointing …
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: We show the object mesh (first row) and the penetra￾tion map (second row). When the guidance mesh lacks the correct topology, such as missing a hole for the head in the helmet, body refinement cannot fix the issue and ends up enclosing the entire head. Starting from t…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: We fabricated the objects in the real world with 3D printing. The objects can be worn as accessories on real people and characters. Sketch 2D Image Human + Object [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: We show an application of lifting a sketch into a body￾fitting 3D object design. 5. Conclusion In this work, we present ShapeCraft, a 3D object design framework that integrates body and semantic awareness into the generative process. Our method synthesizes body-aware …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Tripo ai

    Tripo AI. Tripo ai. https://www.tripo3d.ai/, 2024. 4

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    Kim, Siddhartha Chaudhuri, Jun Saito, and Thibault Groueix

    Noam Aigerman, Kunal Gupta, Vladimir G. Kim, Siddhartha Chaudhuri, Jun Saito, and Thibault Groueix. Neural jacobian fields: learning intrinsic mappings of arbitrary meshes. ACM Trans. Graph., 41(4), jul 2022. 3

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    Semantic deformation transfer

    Ilya Baran, Daniel Vlasic, Eitan Grinspun, and Jovan Popovi´c. Semantic deformation transfer. In ACM SIG- GRAPH 2009 papers, pages 1–6, 2009. 3

    work page 2009

  4. [4]

    Learning Body-Aware 3D Shape Generative Models

    Bryce Blinn, Alexander Ding, R Kenny Jones, Mano- lis Savva, Srinath Sridhar, and Daniel Ritchie. Learning body-aware 3d shape generative models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.07022, 2021. 2, 3

    work page Pith review arXiv 2021

  5. [5]

    Text2tex: Text-driven tex- ture synthesis via diffusion models

    Dave Zhenyu Chen, Yawar Siddiqui, Hsin-Ying Lee, Sergey Tulyakov, and Matthias Nießner. Text2tex: Text-driven tex- ture synthesis via diffusion models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , pages 18558–18568, 2023. 3

    2023

  6. [6]

    Text2shape: Generating shapes from natural language by learning joint embeddings

    Kevin Chen, Christopher B Choy, Manolis Savva, An- gel X Chang, Thomas Funkhouser, and Silvio Savarese. Text2shape: Generating shapes from natural language by learning joint embeddings. InComputer Vision–ACCV 2018: 14th Asian Conference on Computer Vision, Perth, Australia, December 2–6, 2018, Revised Selected Papers, Part III 14 , pages 100–116. Springer...

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Fan- tasia3d: Disentangling geometry and appearance for high- quality text-to-3d content creation

    Rui Chen, Yongwei Chen, Ningxin Jiao, and Kui Jia. Fan- tasia3d: Disentangling geometry and appearance for high- quality text-to-3d content creation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , pages 22246–22256, 2023. 2

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Reprise: A design tool for specifying, generating, and customizing 3d printable adaptations on everyday objects

    Xiang’Anthony’ Chen, Jeeeun Kim, Jennifer Mankoff, Tovi Grossman, Stelian Coros, and Scott E Hudson. Reprise: A design tool for specifying, generating, and customizing 3d printable adaptations on everyday objects. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pages 29–39, 2016. 3

    work page 2016

Show all 63 references
  1. [9]

    The economic potential of generative ai

    Michael Chui, Eric Hazan, Roger Roberts, Alex Singla, and Kate Smaje. The economic potential of generative ai. 2023. 2

    2023

  2. [10]

    3d paintbrush: Local stylization of 3d shapes with cascaded score distillation

    Dale Decatur, Itai Lang, Kfir Aberman, and Rana Hanocka. 3d paintbrush: Local stylization of 3d shapes with cascaded score distillation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.09571, 2023. 3

    2023 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Art and the science of generative ai: A deeper dive

    Ziv Epstein, Aaron Hertzmann, Laura Herman, Robert Ma- hari, Morgan R Frank, Matthew Groh, Hope Schroeder, Amy Smith, Memo Akten, Jessica Fjeld, et al. Art and the science of generative ai: A deeper dive. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.04141, 2023. 2

    2023 arXiv

  4. [12]

    VIVE3D: Viewpoint-independent 8 video editing using 3D-aware GANs

    Anna Fr ¨uhst¨uck, Nikolaos Sarafianos, Yuanlu Xu, Peter Wonka, and Tony Tung. VIVE3D: Viewpoint-independent 8 video editing using 3D-aware GANs. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2023. 3

    2023

  5. [13]

    Get3d: A generative model of high quality 3d tex- tured shapes learned from images

    Jun Gao, Tianchang Shen, Zian Wang, Wenzheng Chen, Kangxue Yin, Daiqing Li, Or Litany, Zan Gojcic, and Sanja Fidler. Get3d: A generative model of high quality 3d tex- tured shapes learned from images. Advances In Neural In- formation Processing Systems, 35:31841–31854, 2022. 2

    2022

  6. [14]

    Automatic unpaired shape deformation transfer

    Lin Gao, Jie Yang, Yi-Ling Qiao, Yu-Kun Lai, Paul L Rosin, Weiwei Xu, and Shihong Xia. Automatic unpaired shape deformation transfer. ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG), 37(6):1–15, 2018. 3

    2018

  7. [15]

    Textdeformer: Geometry manipu- lation using text guidance

    William Gao, Noam Aigerman, Thibault Groueix, V ova Kim, and Rana Hanocka. Textdeformer: Geometry manipu- lation using text guidance. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2023 Con- ference Proceedings, pages 1–11, 2023. 3, 7

    2023

  8. [16]

    Unsupervised cycle- consistent deformation for shape matching

    Thibault Groueix, Matthew Fisher, Vladimir G Kim, Bryan C Russell, and Mathieu Aubry. Unsupervised cycle- consistent deformation for shape matching. In Computer Graphics Forum, volume 38, pages 123–133. Wiley Online Library, 2019. 3

    2019

  9. [17]

    Bounded biharmonic weights for real-time deformation

    Alec Jacobson, Ilya Baran, Jovan Popovic, and Olga Sorkine. Bounded biharmonic weights for real-time deformation. ACM Trans. Graph., 30(4):78, 2011. 3

    2011

  10. [18]

    Zero-shot text-guided object genera- tion with dream fields

    Ajay Jain, Ben Mildenhall, Jonathan T Barron, Pieter Abbeel, and Ben Poole. Zero-shot text-guided object genera- tion with dream fields. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF con- ference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 867–876, 2022. 3

    2022

  11. [19]

    Shap-e: Generat- ing conditional 3d implicit functions

    Heewoo Jun and Alex Nichol. Shap-e: Generat- ing conditional 3d implicit functions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.02463, 2023. 2

    2023 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Geometry transfer for stylizing radiance fields

    Hyunyoung Jung, Seonghyeon Nam, Nikolaos Sarafianos, Sungjoo Yoo, Alexander Sorkine-Hornung, and Rakesh Ran- jan. Geometry transfer for stylizing radiance fields. InCVPR,

  13. [21]

    Design of personalized scoliosis braces based on differen- tiable biomechanics—synthetic study

    Kateryna Kardash, Christos Koutras, and Miguel A Otaduy. Design of personalized scoliosis braces based on differen- tiable biomechanics—synthetic study. Frontiers in Bioengi- neering and Biotechnology, 10:1014365, 2022. 3

    2022

  14. [22]

    Clip-mesh: Generating textured meshes from text using pretrained image-text models

    Nasir Mohammad Khalid, Tianhao Xie, Eugene Belilovsky, and Popa Tiberiu. Clip-mesh: Generating textured meshes from text using pretrained image-text models. SIGGRAPH Asia 2022 Conference Papers, December 2022. 3

    2022

  15. [23]

    Modular primitives for high-performance differentiable rendering

    Samuli Laine, Janne Hellsten, Tero Karras, Yeongho Seol, Jaakko Lehtinen, and Timo Aila. Modular primitives for high-performance differentiable rendering. ACM Transac- tions on Graphics, 39(6), 2020. 3

    2020

  16. [24]

    Sit & relax: Interactive design of body-supporting surfaces

    Kurt Leimer, Michael Birsak, Florian Rist, and Przemyslaw Musialski. Sit & relax: Interactive design of body-supporting surfaces. In Computer Graphics Forum, volume 37, pages 349–359. Wiley Online Library, 2018. 3

    2018

  17. [25]

    Pose to seat: Automated design of body-supporting surfaces

    Kurt Leimer, Andreas Winkler, Stefan Ohrhallinger, and Przemyslaw Musialski. Pose to seat: Automated design of body-supporting surfaces. Computer Aided Geometric De- sign, 79:101855, 2020. 3

    2020

  18. [26]

    Diffavatar: Simulation-ready garment optimization with differentiable simulation

    Yifei Li, Hsiao-yu Chen, Egor Larionov, Nikolaos Sarafi- anos, Wojciech Matusik, and Tuur Stuyck. Diffavatar: Simulation-ready garment optimization with differentiable simulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.12194, 2023. 3

    2023 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Magic3d: High-resolution text-to-3d content creation

    Chen-Hsuan Lin, Jun Gao, Luming Tang, Towaki Takikawa, Xiaohui Zeng, Xun Huang, Karsten Kreis, Sanja Fidler, Ming-Yu Liu, and Tsung-Yi Lin. Magic3d: High-resolution text-to-3d content creation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognitio...

    2023

  20. [28]

    Pa- parazzi: surface editing by way of multi-view image process- ing

    Hsueh-Ti Derek Liu, Michael Tao, and Alec Jacobson. Pa- parazzi: surface editing by way of multi-view image process- ing. ACM Trans. Graph., 37(6):221–1, 2018. 3

    2018

  21. [29]

    Zero-1-to-3: Zero-shot one image to 3d object

    Ruoshi Liu, Rundi Wu, Basile Van Hoorick, Pavel Tok- makov, Sergey Zakharov, and Carl V ondrick. Zero-1-to-3: Zero-shot one image to 3d object. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , pages 9298–9309, 2023. 2

    2023

  22. [30]

    Syncdreamer: Gen- erating multiview-consistent images from a single-view im- age

    Yuan Liu, Cheng Lin, Zijiao Zeng, Xiaoxiao Long, Lingjie Liu, Taku Komura, and Wenping Wang. Syncdreamer: Gen- erating multiview-consistent images from a single-view im- age. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2023. 2

    2023

  23. [31]

    Meshd- iffusion: Score-based generative 3d mesh modeling

    Zhen Liu, Yao Feng, Michael J Black, Derek Nowrouzezahrai, Liam Paull, and Weiyang Liu. Meshd- iffusion: Score-based generative 3d mesh modeling. In The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations, 2022. 2

    2022

  24. [32]

    How can large language models help humans in design and manufacturing? arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.14377, 2023

    Liane Makatura, Michael Foshey, Bohan Wang, Felix H¨ahnLein, Pingchuan Ma, Bolei Deng, Megan Tjandra- suwita, Andrew Spielberg, Crystal Elaine Owens, Pe- ter Yichen Chen, et al. How can large language models help humans in design and manufacturing? arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.14...

    2023 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Physical simulation layer for accurate 3d modeling

    Mariem Mezghanni, Th ´eo Bodrito, Malika Boulkenafed, and Maks Ovsjanikov. Physical simulation layer for accurate 3d modeling. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 13514– 13523, 2022. 2

    2022

  26. [34]

    Text2mesh: Text-driven neural stylization for meshes

    Oscar Michel, Roi Bar-On, Richard Liu, Sagie Benaim, and Rana Hanocka. Text2mesh: Text-driven neural stylization for meshes. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 13492– 13502, 2022. 3

    2022

  27. [35]

    Clip-mesh: Generating textured meshes from text using pretrained image-text models

    Nasir Mohammad Khalid, Tianhao Xie, Eugene Belilovsky, and Tiberiu Popa. Clip-mesh: Generating textured meshes from text using pretrained image-text models. InSIGGRAPH Asia 2022 conference papers, pages 1–8, 2022. 3

    2022

  28. [36]

    Point-e: A system for generat- ing 3d point clouds from complex prompts

    Alex Nichol, Heewoo Jun, Prafulla Dhariwal, Pamela Mishkin, and Mark Chen. Point-e: A system for generat- ing 3d point clouds from complex prompts. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.08751, 2022. 2

    2022 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Dall-e 3

    OpenAI. Dall-e 3. https://openai.com/dall-e-3, 2023. 2

    2023

  30. [38]

    Dreamfusion: Text-to-3d using 2d diffusion

    Ben Poole, Ajay Jain, Jonathan T Barron, and Ben Milden- hall. Dreamfusion: Text-to-3d using 2d diffusion. In The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representa- tions, 2022. 2, 3

    2022

  31. [39]

    Magic123: 9 One image to high-quality 3d object generation using both 2d and 3d diffusion priors

    Guocheng Qian, Jinjie Mai, Abdullah Hamdi, Jian Ren, Aliaksandr Siarohin, Bing Li, Hsin-Ying Lee, Ivan Sko- rokhodov, Peter Wonka, Sergey Tulyakov, et al. Magic123: 9 One image to high-quality 3d object generation using both 2d and 3d diffusion priors. In The Twelfth Internati...

    2023

  32. [40]

    Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervi- sion

    Alec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Chris Hallacy, Aditya Ramesh, Gabriel Goh, Sandhini Agarwal, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Pamela Mishkin, Jack Clark, et al. Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervi- sion. In International conference on machine learning, ...

    2021

  33. [41]

    Texture: Text-guided texturing of 3d shapes

    Elad Richardson, Gal Metzer, Yuval Alaluf, Raja Giryes, and Daniel Cohen-Or. Texture: Text-guided texturing of 3d shapes. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2023 Conference Proceedings, pages 1–11, 2023. 3

    2023

  34. [42]

    High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models

    Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Dominik Lorenz, Patrick Esser, and Bj ¨orn Ommer. High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 10684–10695, 2022. 2

    2022

  35. [43]

    Garment3dgen: 3d garment stylization and texture generation

    Nikolaos Sarafianos, Tuur Stuyck, Xiaoyu Xiang, Yilei Li, Jovan Popovic, and Rakesh Ranjan. Garment3dgen: 3d garment stylization and texture generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.18816, 2024. 2, 3, 4

    2024 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Sketchchair: an all-in-one chair design system for end users

    Greg Saul, Manfred Lau, Jun Mitani, and Takeo Igarashi. Sketchchair: an all-in-one chair design system for end users. In Proceedings of the fifth international conference on Tan- gible, embedded, and embodied interaction , pages 73–80,

  37. [45]

    Laplacian surface editing

    Olga Sorkine, Daniel Cohen-Or, Yaron Lipman, Marc Alexa, Christian R ¨ossl, and H-P Seidel. Laplacian surface editing. In Proceedings of the 2004 Eurographics/ACM SIGGRAPH symposium on Geometry processing , pages 175–184, 2004. 3

    2004

  38. [46]

    Deformation transfer for triangle meshes

    Robert W Sumner and Jovan Popovi ´c. Deformation transfer for triangle meshes. ACM Transactions on graphics (TOG), 23(3):399–405, 2004. 3

    2004

  39. [47]

    Haisor: Human-aware indoor scene optimization via deep reinforcement learning

    Jia-Mu Sun, Jie Yang, Kaichun Mo, Yu-Kun Lai, Leonidas Guibas, and Lin Gao. Haisor: Human-aware indoor scene optimization via deep reinforcement learning. ACM Trans- actions on Graphics, 43(2):1–17, 2024. 3

    2024

  40. [48]

    Textmesh: Gen- eration of realistic 3d meshes from text prompts

    Christina Tsalicoglou, Fabian Manhardt, Alessio Tonioni, Michael Niemeyer, and Federico Tombari. Textmesh: Gen- eration of realistic 3d meshes from text prompts. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.12439, 2023. 2

    2023 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Language- driven scene synthesis using multi-conditional diffusion model

    An Dinh Vuong, Minh Nhat Vu, Toan Nguyen, Baoru Huang, Dzung Nguyen, Thieu V o, and Anh Nguyen. Language- driven scene synthesis using multi-conditional diffusion model. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024. 3

    2024

  42. [50]

    Yeh, and Greg Shakhnarovich

    Haochen Wang, Xiaodan Du, Jiahao Li, Raymond A. Yeh, and Greg Shakhnarovich. Score jacobian chaining: Lift- ing pretrained 2d diffusion models for 3d generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.00774, 2022. 3

    2022 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Learning a shared shape space for multimodal garment design

    Tuanfeng Y Wang, Duygu Ceylan, Jovan Popovi ´c, and Niloy J Mitra. Learning a shared shape space for multimodal garment design. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) , 37(6):1–13, 2018. 2, 3

    2018

  44. [52]

    Linear subspace design for real-time shape deformation

    Yu Wang, Alec Jacobson, Jernej Barbi ˇc, and Ladislav Ka- van. Linear subspace design for real-time shape deformation. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 34(4):1–11, 2015. 3

    2015

  45. [53]

    Is that a chair? imagining affordances using simulations of an articulated human body

    Hongtao Wu, Deven Misra, and Gregory S Chirikjian. Is that a chair? imagining affordances using simulations of an articulated human body. In 2020 IEEE International Confer- ence on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 7240–7246. IEEE, 2020. 3

    2020

  46. [54]

    Scene synthesis from hu- man motion

    Sifan Ye, Yixing Wang, Jiaman Li, Dennis Park, C Karen Liu, Huazhe Xu, and Jiajun Wu. Scene synthesis from hu- man motion. In SIGGRAPH Asia 2022 Conference Papers, pages 1–9, 2022. 3, 4

    2022

  47. [55]

    Texture- dreamer: Image-guided texture synthesis through geometry- aware diffusion

    Yu-Ying Yeh, Jia-Bin Huang, Changil Kim, Lei Xiao, Thu Nguyen-Phuoc, Numair Khan, Cheng Zhang, Manmohan Chandraker, Carl S Marshall, Zhao Dong, et al. Texture- dreamer: Image-guided texture synthesis through geometry- aware diffusion. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.09416, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Mime: Human- aware 3d scene generation

    Hongwei Yi, Chun-Hao P Huang, Shashank Tripathi, Lea Hering, Justus Thies, and Michael J Black. Mime: Human- aware 3d scene generation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 12965–12976, 2023. 3

    2023

  49. [57]

    Neural cages for detail-preserving 3d deformations

    Wang Yifan, Noam Aigerman, Vladimir G Kim, Siddhartha Chaudhuri, and Olga Sorkine-Hornung. Neural cages for detail-preserving 3d deformations. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 75–83, 2020. 3

    2020

  50. [58]

    Paint3d: Paint anything 3d with lighting-less texture diffusion models

    Xianfang Zeng. Paint3d: Paint anything 3d with lighting-less texture diffusion models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.13913,

    arXiv

  51. [59]

    Deformation- driven shape correspondence

    Hao Zhang, Alla Sheffer, Daniel Cohen-Or, Quan Zhou, Oliver Van Kaick, and Andrea Tagliasacchi. Deformation- driven shape correspondence. In Computer Graphics Forum, volume 27, pages 1431–1439. Wiley Online Library, 2008. 3

    2008

  52. [60]

    Adding conditional control to text-to-image diffusion models

    Lvmin Zhang, Anyi Rao, and Maneesh Agrawala. Adding conditional control to text-to-image diffusion models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 3836–3847, 2023. 7

    2023

  53. [61]

    Ergoboss: onomic ptimization of dy-upporting urfaces

    Danyong Zhao, Yijing Li, Siddhartha Chaudhuri, Timothy Langlois, and Jernej Barbi ˇc. Ergoboss: onomic ptimization of dy-upporting urfaces. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 28(12):4032–4047, 2021. 3

    2021

  54. [62]

    Ergonomics-inspired reshaping and exploration of collec- tions of models

    Youyi Zheng, Han Liu, Julie Dorsey, and Niloy J Mitra. Ergonomics-inspired reshaping and exploration of collec- tions of models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 22(6):1732–1744, 2015. 3

    2015

  55. [63]

    Hifa: High- fidelity text-to-3d generation with advanced diffusion guid- ance

    Junzhe Zhu, Peiye Zhuang, and Sanmi Koyejo. Hifa: High- fidelity text-to-3d generation with advanced diffusion guid- ance. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2023. 2 10

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.