Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 89 references

AIMold turns a single CAD solid into a complete mold assembly in STEP format.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-05 00:11 UTC pith:4T4GNK6B

load-bearing objection A genuinely useful new dataset and a sensible pipeline, but the 'manufacturing-ready' claim outruns the evidence; the evaluation never checks whether the generated assemblies would actually demold. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2608.00800 v1 pith:4T4GNK6B submitted 2026-08-01 cs.CV

AIMold: An Autonomous AI-based Pipeline for Complex Mold Design

Pengyun Qiu , Shuo Wang , Zeyuan Chen , Yihao Zhi , Chongjie Ye , Xiaoguang Han This is my paper
classification cs.CV
keywords injection moldingmold assembly generationCAD/CAMdemolding orientationauxiliary componentsparting surfacepaired datasetstructured latent generation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper is trying to establish that complex injection-mold design—choosing a demolding direction, deciding where auxiliary components are needed, and cutting a parting surface—can be automated as a learning problem instead of a manual expert workflow. If true, engineers would hand a single solid body to a system and receive a complete, editable STEP mold assembly ready for CAD/CAM verification. The evidence rests on MoldCAD, a new paired dataset of professionally designed mold assemblies, and on AIMold, a two-stage generative pipeline with classifier-based orientation selection and mesh-to-CAD post-processing. The paper's own caveat is that manufacturability is learned implicitly from the dataset rather than checked geometrically, so the claim's strength depends on how fully MoldCAD encodes real demolding constraints.

Core claim

The central claim: a complete injection-mold assembly can be generated end-to-end from a single-body CAD solid. The authors build MoldCAD, a paired dataset of 4,934 parts and over 3,850 professional mold assemblies with instance-level annotations, then train AIMold to choose a demolding orientation by classifying plane-detection candidates, generate auxiliary components and the upper/lower mold split through two-stage voxel generation refined by a rectified-flow structured-latent model, and export NURBS/STEP assemblies. They report large gains over regression and implicit-latent baselines on MoldCAD's test split, with the caveat that demolding constraints are learned implicitly, never checke

What carries the argument

The load-bearing asset is MoldCAD itself: because the pipeline never enforces demolding constraints geometrically, the dataset's engineer-authored assemblies are the only carrier of manufacturability knowledge. The generative machinery is a two-stage voxel-to-mesh pipeline—a 3D VAE voxel encoder/decoder predicts coarse occupancy of auxiliary components and molds, and a transformer-based rectified-flow model generates structured latents on active voxels, decoded through FlexiCubes into meshes. Post-processing (Poisson reconstruction, RANSAC primitive fitting, parting-surface fitting, ShapeUp optimization, quad-remeshing, NURBS conversion) regularizes the meshes into a STEP assembly. Orientati

Load-bearing premise

The pipeline never checks whether a generated assembly can actually be demolded; it trusts that the engineer-authored MoldCAD designs fully encode demoldability, so if those designs are incomplete, biased, or too few, the claimed 'manufacturing-ready' assemblies may not open cleanly.

What would settle it

Run a standard demoldability/collision analysis on a random sample of generated STEP assemblies along the predicted demolding orientation, or 3D-print small-scale prototypes and physically separate the molds. If a substantial fraction of assemblies cannot open without collision between the part and the molds or auxiliary components—especially around thin structures and missing faces, which the paper lists as failure modes—the central 'manufacturing-ready' claim is falsified. Because the test set shares the dataset's ground-truth assumptions, only an external check of this kind can settle it.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • Mold design for parts with undercuts, side holes, or re-entrant features becomes a trainable conditional-generation task instead of a manual expert workflow.
  • A downstream CAD/CAM pipeline can start from a complete editable STEP assembly, cutting the cost of the design stage even if engineers still verify and adjust.
  • Plane-candidate classification is a practical way to handle the one-to-many orientation problem: the paper reports 91.17% accuracy versus 12.66% for naive regression.
  • Two-stage voxel-to-refinement generation works where large-scale implicit latent models struggle, which matters for domains with small, specialized datasets.
  • The dataset plus pipeline can serve as a template for other manufacturing tooling, such as fixtures, jigs, and multi-piece casting equipment.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Because manufacturability is only implicit, an external collision-based demolding check on generated assemblies would be the sharpest next test; thin features and missing faces, the paper's own failure modes, are exactly where such checks should fail.
  • The one-to-many nature of mold design is only partially respected: orientation is a choice among candidates, but the number and configuration of auxiliary components are predicted as a single output. Sampling multiple assemblies per part would match the true design space.
  • The strong pretraining effect reported in the ablation suggests that general 3D data can substitute for some domain-specific data; scaling MoldCAD may matter less than choosing the right transferable representation.
  • Extending MoldCAD to multi-body parts, non-watertight inputs, or parts with internal channels would test whether the pipeline generalizes beyond the curated single-body setting.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper introduces MoldCAD, a paired dataset of 4,934 single-body CAD parts with over 3,850 professional mold assemblies (upper/lower molds, parting surfaces, demolding orientations, auxiliary components), and AIMold, a two-stage generative pipeline that predicts demolding orientation, generates auxiliary components and mold halves in voxel and mesh domains, then post-processes the outputs into STEP files. The authors claim that this yields a complete, manufacturing-ready mold assembly for downstream CAD/CAM workflows. Quantitative comparisons use COV/MMD/JSD against the MoldCAD test set, and ablations examine the two-stage design and pretraining. A single 3D-printed prototype is reported as physical validation.

Significance. If the dataset is made available and the system performs as claimed, this is a meaningful contribution: MoldCAD appears to be the first large-scale paired dataset for complex mold assembly design, with rich per-component annotations. The pipeline is a sensible decomposition of the mold design task into orientation estimation, auxiliary-component generation, and upper/lower mold generation, and the use of a structure-latent refinement stage is technically reasonable. The strengths are the dataset construction and the end-to-end demonstration, which could serve as a strong baseline for future learning-based mold design. However, the central claim of 'manufacturing-ready' is not supported by the evaluation, which measures distributional similarity to human ground truth rather than demoldability or manufacturability.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract; §3.1; §5.2; Appendix A; §5.4; Appendix B] The load-bearing claim of a 'complete, manufacturing-ready mold assembly' is not supported by the evidence. §3.1 explicitly states that the system does not enforce demolding constraints during generation and relies on implicit priors. The evaluation in §5.2/Appendix A reports COV/MMD/JSD on 2,000 surface samples, which measure distributional similarity to the same dataset's ground truth, not whether the assembly is actually demoldable. §5.4 concedes missing faces and non-watertight outputs. No geometric test for interpenetration, auxiliary-component retraction clearance, or parting-surface feasibility is reported, and the single 3D-printed prototype in Appendix B is anecdotal. The authors should either add a direct geometric demoldability validation (e.g., collision-free translation of mold halves and auxiliary components along the predicted orientation, watertightness/boolean validity o
  2. [§3.2 Mesh-to-CAD vs §5.4] The post-processing section states that the raw prediction is converted 'into a watertight manifold' via Poisson reconstruction and that final meshes are converted to NURBS and exported as STEP. Yet §5.4 reports that missing faces and non-watertight solids are expected failure cases. These statements are in tension. Please clarify whether the watertightness guarantee holds for all final outputs or only some; if not, the STEP export may be invalid for CAD/CAM use. Report the fraction of test outputs that are watertight and pass boolean/STEP validity checks.
  3. [§3.2 Mesh-to-CAD; Appendix C] The parting surface is constructed by planar or quadratic fitting from the interface between predicted mold halves. Appendix C argues that complex, non-planar parting surfaces are necessary to avoid cutting through features and producing weak mold regions. If the MoldCAD dataset contains such complex parting surfaces, the method's simple fitting may not reproduce them, and the reported COV/MMD/JSD metrics do not isolate parting-surface accuracy. Please provide a parting-surface-specific evaluation (e.g., distance to the ground-truth parting surface) and discuss whether the method handles the non-planar cases that Appendix C motivates.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Table 1] Typo in the caption: 'Auxiliarykeysgenerationfidelity' should be 'Auxiliary components generation fidelity'.
  2. [§5.1] The training/test split ratio (9:1) is stated, but the total number of assemblies used for training and testing is not given. Please report the exact counts for both stages, since the auxiliary-component and mold-generation stages may use different numbers of examples.
  3. [§3.3] The orientation classifier's positive samples are defined by alignment with the ground-truth orientation, but the ground-truth orientation selection criteria are not described. Please state how the ground truth demolding orientation was determined for each assembly and how the alignment threshold was set.
  4. [§4] The dataset claims 4,934 CAD models and over 3,850 mold assemblies, but the relationship between these numbers is not fully explained (e.g., do some parts share assemblies? are some assemblies multi-part?). Clarify the pairing to avoid ambiguity.
  5. [Table 3] The baselines in Table 3 are labeled 'Regressive-based' vs 'Ours'. The regressive baseline is not described in detail. Please specify its architecture, input representation, and training objective.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the paper is a supervised conditional-generation pipeline trained and evaluated on held-out splits of its own dataset; no prediction reduces to a fitted parameter or load-bearing self-citation.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is a supervised learning pipeline, not an analytic derivation. The orientation classifier (§3.3) is trained on labels derived from ground-truth orientations and evaluated on a held-out 10% test split (§5.1, Table 3); this is standard classification, not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. Auxiliary-component and mold generation are trained with a flow-matching objective (Eq. 1) and evaluated with distributional metrics (COV/MMD/JSD) on the same test split (§5.2, Appendix A); matching a held-out distribution is the standard inductive-evaluation paradigm for generative models. The paper explicitly disclaims enforcing demolding constraints (§3.1: "We do not explicitly enforce demolding constraints during generation; instead, we rely on the implicit manufacturability priors present in the training data"), and §5.4 concedes non-watertight outputs; these are validity/limitation gaps between the "manufacturing-ready" claim and the metrics, not circular reductions. No step quotes an equation or result that is equivalent to its input by construction, and the paper contains no load-bearing self-citations or imported uniqueness theorems. The fact that the benchmark is the authors' own dataset weakens external generalization but does not make the derivation circular.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the author-curated MoldCAD dataset (its quality and representativeness) and on the transferability of borrowed generative components. The free parameters are hyperparameters of the learned system rather than physical constants. The main unverified assumption is that implicit manufacturability learned from MoldCAD is enough to produce manufacturing-ready assemblies.

free parameters (4)
  • Voxel grid resolution N
    Section 3.1 defines the voxelized input V(P) in {0,1}^{N x N x N}; N is never reported, and Section 5.4 attributes thin-structure failures to resolution limits, so this hand-chosen value directly affects generation quality.
  • Number of render views for structure latents = 12 (ablated to 4)
    Section 5.1 states 12 images per CAD model are rendered; Table 4 shows reducing to 4 views degrades COV/MMD/JSD, so this tuned hyperparameter affects the central generation quality.
  • Learning rate for first-stage training = 1e-4
    Section 5.1: AdamW with learning rate 1x10^-4; a standard but hand-chosen hyperparameter.
  • Orientation alignment threshold for positive/negative samples
    Section 3.3 defines positives as candidate orientations whose rotation axes align with ground truth; the alignment tolerance is not specified and determines the training labels for the orientation classifier.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Auxiliary components rarely intersect with each other, allowing independent prediction in a shared coordinate system.
    Section 3.2 (Auxiliary Components Generation) uses this to justify naive multi-component occupancy prediction; if false, generated components would overlap unrealistically.
  • domain assumption The learned implicit manufacturability prior from MoldCAD is sufficient to produce demoldable assemblies without explicit geometric constraints.
    Section 3.1 states: 'We do not explicitly enforce demolding constraints during generation; instead, we rely on the implicit manufacturability priors present in the training data.' This is the load-bearing assumption behind the whole pipeline.
  • domain assumption Filtering for water-tightness and wall thickness is sufficient to ensure the retained source parts are injection-moldable.
    Section 4.1 describes the filtering criteria; no moldability simulation or draft-angle analysis is applied to the source parts before professional mold design.
  • standard math The structured latent representation and decoders from [73] transfer to mold assemblies without task-specific architectural changes.
    Section 3.2 adapts the geometry flow model of [73] by removing text/image conditioning; this assumes the representation generalizes from general 3D shapes to mechanical mold assemblies.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 15108 in / 12712 out tokens · 129338 ms · 2026-08-05T00:11:09.355513+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of AIMold: An Autonomous AI-based Pipeline for Complex Mold Design." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4T4GNK6B

@misc{pith2026260800800,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: AIMold: An Autonomous AI-based Pipeline for Complex Mold Design},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4T4GNK6B}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.00800}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Injection molding is the cornerstone of mass-producing plastic components. While current algorithms can automate mold design for basic geometries using standard two-piece molds, complex parts featuring undercuts, side holes, or re-entrant features present a significant challenge. These geometries often necessitate auxiliary components beyond the primary upper and lower molds. In practice, designing these intricate assemblies is a laborious process that relies heavily on expert knowledge. Furthermore, the scarcity of public datasets has hindered the development of effective learning-based solutions. To bridge these gaps, we introduce MoldCAD, a curated dataset that pairs complex single-body CAD parts with industry-standard mold assemblies. Each entry includes the upper and lower molds, parting surfaces, demolding orientations, and necessary auxiliary components. The dataset comprises 4,934 CAD models and over 3,850 mold assemblies, totaling more than 23k individual models. Building upon this dataset, we propose a comprehensive pipeline that predicts demolding orientations, identifies auxiliary components, and constructs parting surfaces to derive a complete, manufacturing-ready mold assembly for downstream CAD/CAM workflows. Our results demonstrate a promising path toward fully automated industrial mold design and contribute to the broader advancement of manufacturing-aware CAD generation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.00800 by Chongjie Ye, Pengyun Qiu, Shuo Wang, Xiaoguang Han, Yihao Zhi, Zeyuan Chen.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Given a single-body CAD model (blue), AIMold generate high quality as￾sembly mold parts, including auxiliary components (yellow), upper and lower molds (cyan/brown). Abstract. Injection molding is the cornerstone of mass-producing plas￾tic components. While current algorithms can automate mold design for basic geometries using standard two-piece molds, complex parts fea￾turing undercuts, side holes, or re-… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Mold assembly details. (a) Exploded view showing the input part (blue), molds (cyan/brown), and auxiliary components (yellow). (b) Geometric necessity: Auxiliary components provide lateral freedom for collision-free demolding. Injection molding is the foundation of global industrial manufacturing. It fa￾cilitates the production of a vast array of products, from small components like keyboard keycaps and bo… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Pipeline overview of our method. The framework first estimates the optimal model orientation via plane detection and classification (a), followed by the generation of auxiliary components (b), and upper and lower molds (c). The detailed generation process (d) operates in two sequential phases: Components Voxel Generation, which predicts a coarse occupancy cube from the voxelized input, and Voxel Refinement… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Illustration of the processing pipeline for manual mold assembly design. (a)-(c) Analyze the part along a chosen demolding direction, localize concave (non-demoldable) regions and determine feasible auxiliary components. (d) Generate auxiliary component solids to address these localized collision issues. (e) Create a parting surface to separate upper and lower molds. and negative samples to select the most… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Visual comparison on MoldCAD dataset. 4.2 Professional Mold Design and Annotation For each curated part, we commission professional mold engineers to design a complete injection-mold assembly following standard industrial practice. Fig￾ure 4 summarizes the typical workflow on a representative part with such fea￾tures. Engineers first select a draft direction and analyze demolding capability along that dire… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Real-world validation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Complex parting surface examples [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_7.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

89 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.16294 (2024)

    Alam, M.F., Ahmed, F.: Gencad: Image-conditioned computer-aided design gener- ation with transformer-based contrastive representation and diffusion priors. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.16294 (2024)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    Alderighi, T., Malomo, L., Auzinger, T., Bickel, B., Cignoni, P., Pietroni, N.: State of the art in computational mould design. Comput. Graph. Forum41(6), 435–452 (2022).https://doi.org/10.1111/CGF.14581

    work page doi:10.1111/cgf.14581 2022

  3. [3]

    ACM Trans

    Alderighi, T., Malomo, L., Bickel, B., Cignoni, P., Pietroni, N.: Volume decompo- sition for two-piece rigid casting. ACM Trans. Graph.40(6), 272:1–272:14 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1145/3478513.3480555

    work page arXiv 2021

  4. [5]

    ACM Trans

    Alderighi, T., Malomo, L., Giorgi, D., Pietroni, N., Bickel, B., Cignoni, P.: Meta- molds: computational design of silicone molds. ACM Trans. Graph.37(4), 136 (2018).https://doi.org/10.1145/3197517.3201381

    work page arXiv 2018

  5. [6]

    Computer-Aided Design39(10), 882–897 (2007)

    Banerjee, A.G., Gupta, S.K.: Geometrical algorithms for automated design of side actions in injection moulding of complex parts. Computer-Aided Design39(10), 882–897 (2007)

    2007

  6. [7]

    In: Computer Graphics Forum

    Bouaziz, S., Deuss, M., Schwartzburg, Y., Weise, T., Pauly, M.: Shape-up: Shaping discrete geometry with projections. In: Computer Graphics Forum. vol. 31, pp. 1657–1667. Wiley Online Library (2012)

    2012

  7. [8]

    In: Seminal graphics: pioneering efforts that shaped the field, pp

    Catmull, E., Clark, J.: Recursively generated b-spline surfaces on arbitrary topo- logical meshes. In: Seminal graphics: pioneering efforts that shaped the field, pp. 183–188 (1998)

    1998

  8. [9]

    Journal of Materials Pro- cessing Technology209(5), 2464–2476 (2009)

    Chakraborty,P.,Reddy,N.V.:Automaticdeterminationofpartingdirections,part- ing lines and surfaces for two-piece permanent molds. Journal of Materials Pro- cessing Technology209(5), 2464–2476 (2009)

    2009

  9. [10]

    In: IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (2022)

    Chan, E.R., Lin, C.Z., Chan, M.A., Nagano, K., Pan, B., De Mello, S., Gallo, O., Guibas, L., Tremblay, J., Khamis, S., et al.: Efficient geometry-aware 3d generative adversarial networks. In: IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (2022)

    2022

  10. [11]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems36, 35799–35813 (2023)

    Deitke, M., Liu, R., Wallingford, M., Ngo, H., Michel, O., Kusupati, A., Fan, A., Laforte, C., Voleti, V., Gadre, S.Y., et al.: Objaverse-xl: A universe of 10m+ 3d objects. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems36, 35799–35813 (2023)

    2023

  11. [12]

    In: IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (2022)

    Deng, Y., Yang, J., Xiang, J., Tong, X.: Gram: Generative radiance manifolds for 3d-aware image generation. In: IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (2022)

    2022

  12. [13]

    Computer-Aided Design45(2), 229–240 (2013)

    Doñate, C.M., Paramio, M.R.: New methodology for demoldability analysis based on volume discretization algorithms. Computer-Aided Design45(2), 229–240 (2013)

    2013

  13. [14]

    In: European Conference on Computer Vision

    Dupont, E., Cherenkova, K., Mallis, D., Gusev, G., Kacem, A., Aouada, D.: Tran- scad: A hierarchical transformer for cad sequence inference from point clouds. In: European Conference on Computer Vision. pp. 19–36. Springer (2024)

    2024

  14. [15]

    Computer-Aided Design40(5), 567–575 (2008)

    Fu,M.:Theapplicationofsurfacedemoldabilityandmoldabilitytoside-coredesign in die and mold cad. Computer-Aided Design40(5), 567–575 (2008)

    work page 2008

  15. [16]

    Gao, J., Shen, T., Wang, Z., Chen, W., Yin, K., Li, D., Litany, O., Gojcic, Z., Fidler, S.: Get3d: A generative model of high quality 3d textured shapes learned 16 P. Qiu, S. Wang, Z. Chen, Y. Zhi, C. Ye, X. Han from images. Advances In Neural Information Processing Systems35, 31841–31854 (2022)

    work page 2022

  16. [17]

    In: Proceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference

    Guo, H., Huang, X., Bai, Y., Gan, H., Shi, Y., et al.: Brepgiff: Lightweight gen- eration of complex b-rep with 3d gat diffusion. In: Proceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference. pp. 26587–26596 (2025)

    work page 2025

  17. [18]

    Herholz, P., Matusik, W., Alexa, M.: Approximating free-form geometry with height fields for manufacturing. Comput. Graph. Forum34(2), 239–251 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1111/CGF.12556

    doi:10.1111/cgf.12556 2015

  18. [19]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems33, 6840–6851 (2020)

    Ho, J., Jain, A., Abbeel, P.: Denoising diffusion probabilistic models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems33, 6840–6851 (2020)

    2020

  19. [20]

    In: ICLR (2024)

    Hong, Y., Zhang, K., Gu, J., Bi, S., Zhou, Y., Liu, D., Liu, F., Sunkavalli, K., Bui, T., Tan, H.: Lrm: Large reconstruction model for single image to 3d. In: ICLR (2024)

    work page 2024

  20. [21]

    The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology95(9), 3985–4001 (2018)

    Hou, B., Huang, Z., Zhou, H., Li, D.: A hybrid approach for automatic parting curve generation in injection mold design. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology95(9), 3985–4001 (2018)

    work page 2018

  21. [22]

    ACM transactions on graphics (TOG)34(6), 1–15 (2015)

    Jakob, W., Tarini, M., Panozzo, D., Sorkine-Hornung, O.: Instant field-aligned meshes. ACM transactions on graphics (TOG)34(6), 1–15 (2015)

    work page 2015

  22. [23]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.13944 (2022)

    Jayaraman, P.K., Lambourne, J.G., Desai, N., Willis, K.D., Sanghi, A., Morris, N.J.: Solidgen: An autoregressive model for direct b-rep synthesis. arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.13944 (2022)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  23. [24]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition

    Jayaraman, P.K., Sanghi, A., Lambourne, J.G., Willis, K.D., Davies, T., Shayani, H., Morris, N.: Uv-net: Learning from boundary representations. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. pp. 11703–11712 (2021)

    2021

  24. [25]

    ACM Transac- tions on Graphics (ToG)32(3), 1–13 (2013)

    Kazhdan, M., Hoppe, H.: Screened poisson surface reconstruction. ACM Transac- tions on Graphics (ToG)32(3), 1–13 (2013)

    2013

  25. [26]

    Ad- vances in Neural Information Processing Systems37, 7552–7579 (2024)

    Khan, M.S., Sinha, S., Sheikh, T.U., Stricker, D., Ali, S.A., Afzal, M.Z.: Text2cad: Generating sequential cad designs from beginner-to-expert level text prompts. Ad- vances in Neural Information Processing Systems37, 7552–7579 (2024)

    2024

  26. [27]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vi- sion and Pattern Recognition

    Khan, M.S., Dupont, E., Ali, S.A., Cherenkova, K., Kacem, A., Aouada, D.: Cad- signet: Cad language inference from point clouds using layer-wise sketch instance guided attention. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vi- sion and Pattern Recognition. pp. 4713–4722 (2024)

    work page 2024

  27. [28]

    In: Proceedings of the 2005 ACM symposium on Solid and Physical Modeling

    Khardekar, R., Burton, G., McMains, S.: Finding feasible mold parting directions using graphics hardware. In: Proceedings of the 2005 ACM symposium on Solid and Physical Modeling. pp. 233–243 (2005)

    work page 2005

  28. [29]

    In: The IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (June 2019)

    Koch, S., Matveev, A., Jiang, Z., Williams, F., Artemov, A., Burnaev, E., Alexa, M., Zorin, D., Panozzo, D.: Abc: A big cad model dataset for geometric deep learning. In: The IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (June 2019)

    work page 2019

  29. [30]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.03052 (2025)

    Lai, Z., Zhao, Y., Zhao, Z., Liu, H., Lin, Q., Huang, J., Guo, C., Yue, X.: Lattice: Democratize high-fidelity 3d generation at scale. arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.03052 (2025)

    arXiv 2025

  30. [31]

    Lambourne, J.G., Willis, K.D., Jayaraman, P.K., Sanghi, A., Meltzer, P., Shayani, H.:Brepnet:Atopologicalmessagepassingsystemforsolidmodels.In:Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. pp. 12773–12782 (2021)

    2021

  31. [32]

    In: Proceedings of the Special Interest Group on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques Conference Conference Papers

    Lee, M., Zhang, D., Jambon, C., Kim, Y.M.: Brepdiff: Single-stage b-rep diffusion model. In: Proceedings of the Special Interest Group on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques Conference Conference Papers. pp. 1–11 (2025) AIMold 17

    work page 2025

  32. [33]

    ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG)39(6), 1–14 (2020)

    Li, C., Pan, H., Bousseau, A., Mitra, N.J.: Sketch2cad: Sequential cad modeling by sketching in context. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG)39(6), 1–14 (2020)

    work page 2020

  33. [34]

    ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG)41(4), 1–16 (2022)

    Li, C., Pan, H., Bousseau, A., Mitra, N.J.: Free2cad: Parsing freehand drawings into cad commands. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG)41(4), 1–16 (2022)

    work page 2022

  34. [35]

    In: ICLR (2024)

    Li, J., Tan, H., Zhang, K., Xu, Z., Luan, F., Xu, Y., Hong, Y., Sunkavalli, K., Shakhnarovich, G., Bi, S.: Instant3d: Fast text-to-3d with sparse-view generation and large reconstruction model. In: ICLR (2024)

    work page 2024

  35. [36]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition

    Li, P., Guo, J., Li, H., Benes, B., Yan, D.M.: Sfmcad: Unsupervised cad reconstruc- tion by learning sketch-based feature modeling operations. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. pp. 4671–4680 (2024)

    work page 2024

  36. [37]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Confer- ence on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

    Li, P., Guo, J., Zhang, X., Yan, D.M.: Secad-net: Self-supervised cad reconstruction by learning sketch-extrude operations. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Confer- ence on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. pp. 16816–16826 (2023)

    work page 2023

  37. [38]

    In: Proceedings of the Special Interest Group on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques Conference Conference Papers

    Li, P., Zhang, W., Chen, J., Yan, D.: Stitch-a-shape: Bottom-up learning for b-rep generation. In: Proceedings of the Special Interest Group on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques Conference Conference Papers. pp. 1–12 (2025)

    work page 2025

  38. [39]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

    Liang, Y., Yang, X., Lin, J., Li, H., Xu, X., Chen, Y.: Luciddreamer: Towards high- fidelity text-to-3d generation via interval score matching. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. pp. 6517– 6526 (2024)

    work page 2024

  39. [40]

    Computer-Aided Design 57, 15–28 (2014)

    Lin, A.C., Quang, N.H.: Automatic generation of mold-piece regions and parting curves for complex cad models in multi-piece mold design. Computer-Aided Design 57, 15–28 (2014)

    work page 2014

  40. [41]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

    Lin, C.H., Gao, J., Tang, L., Takikawa, T., Zeng, X., Huang, X., Kreis, K., Fidler, S., Liu, M.Y., Lin, T.Y.: Magic3d: High-resolution text-to-3d content creation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. pp. 300–309 (2023)

    2023

  41. [42]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.02747 (2022)

    Lipman, Y., Chen, R.T., Ben-Hamu, H., Nickel, M., Le, M.: Flow matching for generative modeling. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.02747 (2022)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  42. [43]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

    Liu, M., Shi, R., Chen, L., Zhang, Z., Xu, C., Wei, X., Chen, H., Zeng, C., Gu, J., Su, H.: One-2-3-45++: Fast single image to 3d objects with consistent multi- view generation and 3d diffusion. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. pp. 10072–10083 (2024)

    work page 2024

  43. [44]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.10198 (2024)

    Liu, M., Zeng, C., Wei, X., Shi, R., Chen, L., Xu, C., Zhang, M., Wang, Z., Zhang, X., Liu, I., et al.: Meshformer: High-quality mesh generation with 3d-guided re- construction model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.10198 (2024)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  44. [45]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.10201 (2025)

    Liu, Y., Dutt, N.S., Li, C., Mitra, N.J.: B-repler: Language-guided editing of cad models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.10201 (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  45. [46]

    ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG)44(4), 1–25 (2025)

    Liu, Y., Xu, D., Yu, X., Xu, X., Cohen-Or, D., Zhang, H., Huang, H.: Hola: B-rep generation using a holistic latent representation. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG)44(4), 1–25 (2025)

    work page 2025

  46. [47]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

    Liu, Y., Obukhov, A., Wegner, J.D., Schindler, K.: Point2cad: Reverse engineering cad models from 3d point clouds. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. pp. 3763–3772 (2024)

    work page 2024

  47. [48]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.05101 (2017)

    Loshchilov, I.: Decoupled weight decay regularization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.05101 (2017)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  48. [49]

    In: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management

    Ma, W., Xu, M., Li, X., Zhou, X.: Multicad: Contrastive representation learning for multi-modal 3d computer-aided design models. In: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. pp. 1766–1776 (2023) 18 P. Qiu, S. Wang, Z. Chen, Y. Zhi, C. Ye, X. Han

    work page 2023

  49. [50]

    ACM Trans

    Malomo, L., Pietroni, N., Bickel, B., Cignoni, P.: Flexmolds: automatic design of flexible shells for molding. ACM Trans. Graph.35(6), 223:1–223:12 (2016).https: //doi.org/10.1145/2980179.2982397

    work page arXiv 2016

  50. [51]

    Computer- Aided Design80, 43–60 (2016)

    Mercado-Colmenero, J.M., Paramio, M., Perez-Garcia, J.M., Martin-Doñate, C.: A new hybrid method for demoldability analysis of discrete geometries. Computer- Aided Design80, 43–60 (2016)

    work page 2016

  51. [52]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

    Müller, N., Siddiqui, Y., Porzi, L., Bulo, S.R., Kontschieder, P., Nießner, M.: Diffrf: Rendering-guided 3d radiance field diffusion. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. pp. 4328–4338 (2023)

    2023

  52. [53]

    Nichol, A., Jun, H., Dhariwal, P., Mishkin, P., Chen, M.: Point-e: A system for generating3dpointcloudsfromcomplexprompts.arXivpreprintarXiv:2212.08751 (2022)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  53. [54]

    Oquab, M., Darcet, T., Moutakanni, T., Vo, H.V., Szafraniec, M., Khalidov, V., Fernandez,P.,Haziza,D.,Massa,F.,El-Nouby,A.,Howes,R.,Huang,P.Y.,Xu,H., Sharma, V., Li, S.W., Galuba, W., Rabbat, M., Assran, M., Ballas, N., Synnaeve, G., Misra, I., Jegou, H., Mairal, J., Labatut, P., Joulin, A., Bojanowski, P.: Dinov2: Learning robust visual features without ...

    2023

  54. [55]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems34, 5077–5088 (2021)

    Para, W., Bhat, S., Guerrero, P., Kelly, T., Mitra, N., Guibas, L.J., Wonka, P.: Sketchgen: Generating constrained cad sketches. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems34, 5077–5088 (2021)

    work page 2021

  55. [56]

    In: ICLR (2023)

    Poole, B., Jain, A., Barron, J.T., Mildenhall, B.: Dreamfusion: Text-to-3d using 2d diffusion. In: ICLR (2023)

    work page 2023

  56. [57]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

    Qi, D., Wang, C., Xu, J., Chu, T., Zhao, Z., Liu, W., Ding, W., Ma, Y., Gao, S.: Pointer-cad: Unifying b-rep and command sequences via pointer-based edges & faces selection. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. pp. 17377–17387 (2026)

    work page 2026

  57. [58]

    Computer-Aided Design42(7), 582–597 (2010)

    Ran, J., Fu, M.: Design of internal pins in injection mold cad via the automatic recognition of undercut features. Computer-Aided Design42(7), 582–597 (2010)

    work page 2010

  58. [59]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition

    Rombach, R., Blattmann, A., Lorenz, D., Esser, P., Ommer, B.: High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. pp. 10684–10695 (2022)

    2022

  59. [60]

    In: Computer graphics forum

    Schnabel, R., Wahl, R., Klein, R.: Efficient ransac for point-cloud shape detection. In: Computer graphics forum. vol. 26, pp. 214–226. Wiley Online Library (2007)

    work page 2007

  60. [61]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2109.14124 (2021)

    Seff, A., Zhou, W., Richardson, N., Adams, R.P.: Vitruvion: A generative model of parametric cad sketches. arXiv preprint arXiv:2109.14124 (2021)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  61. [62]

    ACM Trans

    Shen, T., Munkberg, J., Hasselgren, J., Yin, K., Wang, Z., Chen, W., Gojcic, Z., Fidler, S., Sharp, N., Gao, J.: Flexible isosurface extraction for gradient-based mesh optimization. ACM Trans. Graph.42(4) (jul 2023).https://doi.org/10. 1145/3592430

    work page 2023

  62. [63]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.01416 (2023)

    Skorokhodov, I., Siarohin, A., Xu, Y., Ren, J., Lee, H.Y., Wonka, P., Tulyakov, S.: 3d generation on imagenet. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.01416 (2023)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  63. [64]

    In: International Conference on Machine Learning

    Sohl-Dickstein, J., Weiss, E., Maheswaranathan, N., Ganguli, S.: Deep unsuper- vised learning using nonequilibrium thermodynamics. In: International Conference on Machine Learning. pp. 2256–2265. PMLR (2015)

    work page 2015

  64. [65]

    Stein, O., Jacobson, A., Grinspun, E.: Interactive design of castable shapes using two-piece rigid molds. Comput. Graph.80, 51–62 (2019).https://doi.org/10. 1016/J.CAG.2019.03.001

    work page 2019

  65. [66]

    In: ICLR (2024) AIMold 19

    Tang, J., Ren, J., Zhou, H., Liu, Z., Zeng, G.: Dreamgaussian: Generative gaussian splatting for efficient 3d content creation. In: ICLR (2024) AIMold 19

    work page 2024

  66. [67]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision

    Tang, J., Wang, T., Zhang, B., Zhang, T., Yi, R., Ma, L., Chen, D.: Make-it-3d: High-fidelity 3d creation from a single image with diffusion prior. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision. pp. 22819–22829 (2023)

    work page 2023

  67. [68]

    Team, F.A., Bhat, K., Khanna, N., Channa, K., Zhou, T., Zhu, Y., Sun, X., Shang, C., Sudarshan, A., Chu, M., Li, D., Deng, K., Fauconnier, J.P., Verhulsdonck, T., Agrawala, M., Fatahalian, K., Weiss, A., Reiser, C., Chirravuri, R.K., Kandur, R., Pelaez, A., Garg, A., Palleschi, M., Wang, J., Litz, S., Liu, L., Li, A., Harmon, D., Liu, D., Feng, L., Goupil...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  68. [69]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition

    Willis, K.D., Jayaraman, P.K., Chu, H., Tian, Y., Li, Y., Grandi, D., Sanghi, A., Tran, L., Lambourne, J.G., Solar-Lezama, A., et al.: Joinable: Learning bottom-up assembly of parametric cad joints. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. pp. 15849–15860 (2022)

    work page 2022

  69. [70]

    Advances in neural information processing systems29(2016)

    Wu, J., Zhang, C., Xue, T., Freeman, B., Tenenbaum, J.: Learning a probabilistic latent space of object shapes via 3d generative-adversarial modeling. Advances in neural information processing systems29(2016)

    work page 2016

  70. [71]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision

    Wu, R., Xiao, C., Zheng, C.: Deepcad: A deep generative network for computer- aided design models. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision. pp. 6772–6782 (2021)

    work page 2021

  71. [72]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.14692 (2025)

    Xiang, J., Chen, X., Xu, S., Wang, R., Lv, Z., Deng, Y., Zhu, H., Dong, Y., Zhao, H., Yuan, N.J., et al.: Native and compact structured latents for 3d generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.14692 (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  72. [73]

    In: Proceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference

    Xiang, J., Lv, Z., Xu, S., Deng, Y., Wang, R., Zhang, B., Chen, D., Tong, X., Yang, J.: Structured 3d latents for scalable and versatile 3d generation. In: Proceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference. pp. 21469–21480 (2025)

    2025

  73. [74]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.04954 (2024)

    Xu, J., Wang, C., Zhao, Z., Liu, W., Ma, Y., Gao, S.: Cad-mllm: Uni- fying multimodality-conditioned cad generation with mllm. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.04954 (2024)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  74. [75]

    In: Proceedings of the SIGGRAPH Asia 2025 Conference Papers

    Xu, X., Jayaraman, P., Lambourne, J., Liu, Y., Malpure, D., Meltzer, P.: Au- tobrep: Autoregressive b-rep generation with unified topology and geometry. In: Proceedings of the SIGGRAPH Asia 2025 Conference Papers. pp. 1–12 (2025)

    work page 2025

  75. [76]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.00149 (2023)

    Xu, X., Jayaraman, P.K., Lambourne, J.G., Willis, K.D., Furukawa, Y.: Hi- erarchical neural coding for controllable cad model generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.00149 (2023)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  76. [77]

    ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG)43(4), 1–14 (2024)

    Xu, X., Lambourne, J., Jayaraman, P., Wang, Z., Willis, K., Furukawa, Y.: Brep- gen: A b-rep generative diffusion model with structured latent geometry. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG)43(4), 1–14 (2024)

    2024

  77. [78]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.04632 (2022)

    Xu, X., Willis, K.D., Lambourne, J.G., Cheng, C.Y., Jayaraman, P.K., Furukawa, Y.: Skexgen: Autoregressive generation of cad construction sequences with disen- tangled codebooks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.04632 (2022)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  78. [79]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF confer- ence on computer vision and pattern recognition

    Yavartanoo, M., Hong, S., Neshatavar, R., Lee, K.M.: Cnc-net: self-supervised learning for cnc machining operations. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF confer- ence on computer vision and pattern recognition. pp. 9816–9825 (2024)

    work page 2024

  79. [80]

    In: Proceedings of the SIGGRAPH Asia 2025 Conference Papers

    You, Y., Uy, M.A., Han, J., Thomas, R., Zhang, H., Du, Y., Chen, H., Engelmann, F., You, S., Guibas, L.: Img2cad: Reverse engineering 3d cad models from images through vlm-assisted conditional factorization. In: Proceedings of the SIGGRAPH Asia 2025 Conference Papers. pp. 1–12 (2025) 20 P. Qiu, S. Wang, Z. Chen, Y. Zhi, C. Ye, X. Han

    work page 2025

  80. [81]

    In: Pro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition

    Yu, F., Chen, Z., Li, M., Sanghi, A., Shayani, H., Mahdavi-Amiri, A., Zhang, H.: Capri-net: Learning compact cad shapes with adaptive primitive assembly. In: Pro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. pp. 11768–11778 (2022)

    work page 2022

Showing first 80 references.