Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 80 references

FORGE-SIM claims the first direct image-to-simulation pipeline: a watertight, smooth boundary representation optimized from sparse photos, on which isogeometric heat and modal solves match finite-element ground truth within 1–9%.

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 ↗

FORGE-SIM directly optimizes a six-patch B-spline boundary representation from sparse images and demonstrates isogeometric heat and modal simulations on the reconstructed model.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-01 challenge →

load-bearing objection Genuinely new end-to-end pipeline from sparse images to IGA simulation via spline B-reps, with credible synthetic validation; real-world modal results lean on an unquantified mid-surface approximation and the NVS 'comparable or superior' claim is a bit strong. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.26234 v1 pith:4YM3CDWF submitted 2026-07-28 cs.CV cs.CE

Spline-Based Boundary Representations for Sparse View Reconstruction and Simulation Using Isogeometric Analysis

Davor Dobrota , Vsevolod Skorokhodov , Chenghao Xu , Olga Fink , Malcolm Mielle This is my paper
classification cs.CV cs.CE MSC 65D1765N30
keywords boundary representationisogeometric analysisB-splinesparse view reconstructionthermal simulationmodal analysisReissner-Mindlin shellwatertight geometry
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 reading

The paper's central claim is that a six-patch cubic B-spline boundary representation can be optimized directly from sparse posed RGB images, yielding a watertight, smooth geometry that a physics solver can consume without manual CAD repair or meshing. The authors validate this by running heat-flow and Reissner–Mindlin modal analysis with isogeometric analysis (IGA) on the reconstructed spline and comparing against finite-element simulation on the ground-truth mesh: temperature fields agree within 1.1–6.9% and median eigenfrequencies within 2.5–8.7%. They also show that observation-derived fields—thermal state, semantic material classes—can be inpainted in the same spline basis so the solver uses them directly, and the model can be exported as standard CAD formats. A sympathetic reader would care because it removes the long-standing manual bottleneck between image capture and numerical simulation, enabling as-built digital twins for thermal and structural assessment.

Core claim

The discovery is that optimizing the spline representation itself, rather than reconstructing a mesh or implicit field and converting it, produces geometry that is simultaneously accurate for novel-view synthesis and numerically valid for simulation. FORGE-SIM is, to the authors' knowledge, the first framework to demonstrate shape optimization of a multi-patch B-spline surface directly from images and to run simulation on the resulting reconstruction without manual geometry authoring, repair, or meshing. The key quantitative result is the end-to-end agreement: for the best-reconstructed shapes, IGA on the recovered B-spline boundary representation reproduces FEM heat fields to within about 1

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is a six-patch cubed-sphere B-spline boundary representation: a closed, watertight surface built from six tensor-product cubic B-splines with shared edge/corner control points and near-G1 continuity enforced by a normal-alignment loss plus a Willmore-energy curvature penalty. The shape is optimized by alternating an L-BFGS pass over the global control points with a texture pass, using gradients from a differentiable renderer that evaluates a tessellation of the spline rather than the spline itself; a coarse-to-fine h-refinement schedule increases knot spans as optimization proceeds. The same B-spline basis is then used to represent inpainted thermal and material field

Load-bearing premise

The reconstructed outer surface is treated as the mid-surface of a thin shell whose thickness is small compared with the object's size and curvature, and the metric scale plus material constants are supplied by hand rather than recovered; if the thickness is not small (e.g., Lion with d = 0.02 m vs scale L = 0.3 m) or the scale is wrong, the modal frequencies will shift accordingly.

What would settle it

Take one of the synthetic test objects (known ground truth), reconstruct at native scale, but deliberately set the shell thickness to a non-negligible fraction of the curvature radius (e.g., d ≈ 0.1R) and compare the IGA modal spectrum against a converged 3D FEM solve on the true volume geometry; if the frequency error grows far above the reported 2.5–8.7% band, the mid-surface reduction — not geometry recovery — is the binding assumption. Alternatively, mis-specify the per-scene scale factor by 10% and observe an approximately proportional shift in all reported eigenfrequencies.

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

If this is right

  • If correct, image capture becomes a viable entry point for simulation-driven workflows such as structural health monitoring and thermal inspection, skipping the manual CAD and meshing pipeline.
  • The simulation-fidelity error tracks reconstruction quality, implying that improving geometric reconstruction—not solver refinement—is the next lever for end-to-end accuracy.
  • Because the same spline basis serves both the renderer and the IGA solver, any field that can be rendered (temperature, material class, and so on) can be baked into the model and consumed by a PDE solve without format conversion.
  • The framework's compatibility with both IGA and conventional finite-element workflows (via standard CAD export) means it can slot into existing engineering toolchains rather than requiring new solvers.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the thin-shell reduction is pushed beyond its regime—for instance, a plush object with thickness 0.02 m against a 0.3 m scale, or surfaces with sharp curvature—the modal frequencies will be biased by treating the reconstructed outer surface as the mid-surface; a direct 3D FEM comparison would reveal this bias, which the paper explicitly accepts in the supplementary.
  • The per-scene requirement of a hand-set metric scale and material constants means the pipeline is not yet fully autonomous; recovering absolute scale from thermal/RGB fusion or known references would close the loop.
  • The cubed-sphere six-patch topology restricts reconstructions to genus-0 objects; extending to adaptive spline families such as T-splines or hierarchical B-splines—as the paper itself suggests—is a natural test of whether the parameterization, not the optimization, is the ceiling.
  • A testable extension: run the pipeline on a synthetic object with known ground-truth volume and deliberately varied thickness-to-curvature ratios to calibrate the range of validity of the mid-surface approximation.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

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 / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes FORGE-SIM, a pipeline that reconstructs a six-patch cubic B-spline boundary representation and associated scalar fields (thermal, semantic) directly from sparse posed RGB/thermal images, and then uses the same spline basis for isogeometric heat and Reissner-Mindlin shell modal analyses. The core claims are that this yields watertight, smooth, simulation-ready geometry without manual geometry authoring, repair, or meshing, and that the resulting models are of sufficiently high quality for thermal simulation and modal analysis. Evidence includes synthetic end-to-end comparisons against independent FEM solves on ground-truth meshes (1.1--6.9% heat-field error, 2.5--8.7% median eigenfrequency error, MAC 0.32--0.53), solver-agreement checks on identical geometry (0.3--0.5%), reconstruction/NVS benchmarks, and qualitative real-world thermal and modal demonstrations.

Significance. If the claims hold, this is a valuable contribution at the vision--simulation interface: it demonstrates that a differentiable multi-patch B-spline representation can be optimized from images and consumed directly by IGA solvers, avoiding the usual CAD-repair/meshing pipeline. The paper is strong in several concrete ways: it reports a genuine two-solver agreement study on identical geometry, uses multiple complementary metrics, transparently reports field-transfer artifacts and floor corrections, and provides detailed derivations of the heat and shell formulations. The synthetic end-to-end validation is credible and shows a monotonic relationship between reconstruction quality and simulation error. The main weakness is the real-world modal validation, which is only qualitative and rests on the outer-surface-as-mid-surface shell approximation and manually fixed scale/material parameters; this supports a major revision rather than acceptance.

major comments (3)
  1. [Supplementary Sec. 6.2; Tables 4--5; Sec. 2.1.2] The shell reduction treats the reconstructed outer surface as the Reissner-Mindlin mid-surface. The paper justifies this by saying "the thickness is small compared to the size of the manifold," but for the Lion scene Table 4/5 gives d = 0.02 m and L = 0.3 m, i.e. d/L ≈ 6.7%, which is not small. The synthetic modal validation (Table 1, Fig. S3) uses d = 0.002 m on objects of scale roughly 0.3 m (d/L ≈ 0.7%), so it does not probe this regime. Since shell stiffness and mass depend on mid-surface curvature, using the outer surface shifts effective radii by d/2 and can change eigenfrequencies by several percent or more. This error is unquantified, so the real-scene modal frequencies in Fig. 4 are not supported by the synthetic evidence. The authors should either reconstruct/offset a proper mid-surface, add a quantitative sensitivity analysis for d/L, or explicitly restrict the modal claim to
  2. [Sec. 2.1.2, Sec. 5.6, Table 5, Fig. 4] The real-world modal results depend on a manually estimated metric scale factor L and hand-assigned material parameters E, nu, rho, and d. The paper states these are estimated to give "physically plausible" frequencies, but no ground truth is available and the method for estimating L is not described in Sec. 5.6 despite being referenced there. A sensitivity analysis over L and the material parameters is needed to show that the reported frequencies and the "sufficiently high quality for modal analysis" claim are robust; otherwise the real-scene modal demonstration is only a plausibility statement, not validation.
  3. [Sec. 2.1.1, Fig. 4] The real-world heat simulations are described only qualitatively ("physically coherent thermal diffusion"). In contrast to the synthetic end-to-end heat validation, which is quantitative, the real-scene thermal results have no measured or reference temperature field to compare against. The low assigned temperature of 0.1 in unseen regions (Sec. 5.1.3) may dominate the visual result. The paper should either provide a quantitative proxy for real-scene thermal fidelity or clearly state that real-scene heat results are demonstrations of numerical stability rather than accuracy.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract / Sec. 1] The abstract says the pipeline runs "without manual intervention," but Sec. 1 later qualifies that per-scene inputs include the refinement schedule and physical material parameters, and Sec. 3 notes that metric scale is fixed via an estimated calibration factor. Please harmonize the wording to avoid overclaiming full autonomy.
  2. [Table 1 / Supp. Sec. 7.6] The floor-corrected field discrepancy is computed as sqrt(cross^2 - floor^2). This assumes independence between the cross-field discrepancy and the floor. Since they are computed from the same transfer process, the independence assumption should be justified or the raw values and floors should be used as the primary reporting.
  3. [Fig. 4 caption] The caption should explicitly state that real-world modal frequencies depend on the manually estimated scale and material parameters, and that the results are illustrative, not validated against ground truth.
  4. [Table S4 caption] The mode numbering starts at 6 because modes 0--5 are rigid-body modes. This should be stated in the main text or caption so readers do not misread the fundamental frequency as mode 0.
  5. [Supp. Sec. 7.6] The sentence "We omit the results presented in the main text concerning the relative heat errors..." is confusing; it likely means the section provides supplementary detail rather than omitting results. Please rephrase.
  6. [Table S2] The scene label "Building A Spring" appears to be a typo and should be "Building A".

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: reconstruction and simulation are validated against independent FEM on ground-truth geometry; self-citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. Geometry is optimized against posed RGB images via differentiable rendering of a tessellated B-spline (Methods, Eq. 6), and thermal/material fields are optimized against thermal/segmentation images (Eq. 9); simulation outputs are not used as optimization objectives. The end-to-end heat and modal validations compare IGA on the reconstructed spline against an independent DOLFINx FEM solve on the ground-truth mesh (Supp. Secs. 7.1 and 7.5; Table S2), with both solvers checked to agree on identical geometry. Self-citations (Thermoxels [3], ThermoNeRF [6], BuildNet3D [21], SEAR [43]) are dataset or prior-work pointers and are not load-bearing for the central claim. Two caveats are noted but are not circular: (i) hyperparameters were tuned on Suzanne (Sec. 5.4), mildly biasing that row in Table 1; (ii) Supp. Sec. 6.2 acknowledges using the reconstructed outer surface as the shell mid-surface, an approximation whose error is not quantified for the real scenes. Neither makes a reported prediction equal to its input by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

9 free parameters · 8 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a stack of modeling choices: thin-shell reduction, genus-0 topology, manual material/scale inputs, and an assumed-distribution quadrature. No invented physical entities are introduced. The largest burden is not from hidden equations but from the fact that every simulation requires user-selected material properties and, on real scenes, a user-calibrated scale factor.

free parameters (9)
  • Loss weights alpha, beta, gamma = alpha=0.85, beta=1e-2, gamma=2e-5
    Tuned empirically on Suzanne (Sec. 5.4); Suzanne is also an evaluation scene, so this is mild tuning on test data.
  • Per-scene refinement schedules = e.g., iterations {25,50,80,140} for textureless meshes; varied schedules for buildings and real scenes
    Chosen manually per scene (Sec. 5.4); a per-scene human input despite the 'no manual intervention' framing.
  • Number of training views = 12 (Suzanne/Bunny), 24 (Spot), 32 (Armadillo); 12-32 for real scenes
    Scene-dependent experimental choice that affects reconstruction and simulation fidelity.
  • Real-world metric scale factor L = 15.0 m (Building A), 4.0 (Car), 2.5 (Woodshed), 0.3 (Lion)
    Estimated per scene (Sec. 5.6); modal frequencies are directly proportional to this factor, so it is load-bearing.
  • Material and thickness parameters = k, rho, Cp, d, E, nu per scene (Tables 4 and 5)
    Assigned by hand; the simulation 'predictions' depend on user-chosen physical properties rather than being fully recovered from images.
  • Heat time-step factor tau = 1e-5
    Chosen to resolve sharp transients (Sec. 5.5).
  • Texture and tessellation resolutions = patch textures 512x512; mesh 256x256x2; modal 128 knot spans; thermal inpainting 256 spans
    Computational resolution choices that affect reconstructed detail and simulated spectra.
  • Drilling stabilization coefficient c_d = 1
    Set to O(1) in the Reissner-Mindlin shell formulation (Supp. 6.6).
  • Initial pose search constants = cmin=0.01, cmax=0.9
    Bracket for initial scale selection in Supp. 8.2; affects initialization robustness.
axioms (8)
  • domain assumption Thin-shell dimensional reduction with negligible through-thickness variation; error O(d_max) along the normal.
    Supp. S5.3 and S6.2; central to reducing the 3D heat equation and 3D elasticity to surface PDEs.
  • domain assumption The reconstructed outer surface is treated as the shell mid-surface.
    Supp. 6.2: 'we accept the approximation error, noting that the thickness is small compared to the size of the manifold.'
  • domain assumption Surface material is Lambertian with per-patch albedo.
    Sec. 4.2.5; the rendering and shape optimization model assumes perfectly diffuse surfaces.
  • ad hoc to paper A six-patch cubed-sphere topology with shared control points is sufficient to represent the target objects (genus-0, no handles or through-holes).
    Sec. 4.1 and Discussion; the paper explicitly lists this as a limitation.
  • domain assumption VGGT camera poses and SAM3 segmentations are sufficiently accurate.
    Sec. 5.1.3; pose and segmentation errors propagate directly into geometry and therefore into simulation.
  • domain assumption Ground-truth mesh pre-processing (capping holes, removing interior bodies) preserves the recoverable geometry.
    Supp. 7.2; verified for Suzanne (<0.1% area change) but not quantified for Bunny's capped base.
  • standard math Numerical quadrature rules avoid under-integration (2p+1 points for IGA, 2p for Willmore energy).
    Supp. 3.5 and 5.7; standard practice, though the Willmore order is partly empirical ('we found 2p sufficient').
  • domain assumption The FEM reference solver with B-bar projection is a valid locking-free ground truth.
    Supp. 6.12 and 7.4; the end-to-end comparison depends on this reference being accurate.

reviewed 2026-08-01 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Spline-Based Boundary Representations for Sparse View Reconstruction and Simulation Using Isogeometric Analysis." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4YM3CDWF

@misc{pith2026260726234,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Spline-Based Boundary Representations for Sparse View Reconstruction and Simulation Using Isogeometric Analysis},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4YM3CDWF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.26234}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Image-based reconstruction aims to recover three-dimensional geometry from images. Recent advances have enabled the recovery of visually detailed models, yet their representations are not well-suited for numerical simulation. Simulation frameworks typically require explicit, watertight, and smooth geometries to ensure numerical robustness and accuracy, properties that surfaces extracted from image-based reconstructions lack. We propose FORGE-SIM, a method to directly reconstruct a multi-patch B-spline boundary representation from sparse posed RGB images without manual intervention. By optimizing the spline representation itself, our approach produces compact, smooth, and watertight geometries that are natively compatible with both Computer Aided Design and simulation workflows. Additionally, we introduce a strategy to project observation-derived fields, such as a thermal state and semantic information, onto the reconstructed models in the same spline basis, enabling immediate use in simulation. We demonstrate that the obtained models are of sufficiently high quality to enable thermal simulation and modal analysis. By unifying image-based reconstruction and simulation-ready modeling within a single optimization framework, this work removes a long-standing barrier between computer vision and numerical analysis. We anticipate that it will enable new workflows for simulation-driven design, inspection, and digital twin applications.

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

80 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering1076(1), 012119 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/1076/1/012119

    Hadi, A.S., Abd, A.M., Mahmood, M.: Integrity of Revit with structural analysis softwares. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering1076(1), 012119 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/1076/1/012119

    work page doi:10.1088/1757-899x/1076/1/012119 2021

  2. [2]

    International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering123(18), 4296–4322 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.7010 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/nme.7010

    Liu, Z., McBride, A., Saxena, P., Heltai, L., Qu, Y., Steinmann, P.: Vibration analysis of piezoelectric kirchhoff–love shells based on cat- mull–clark subdivision surfaces. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering123(18), 4296–4322 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.7010 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/nme.7010

    work page doi:10.1002/nme.7010 2022

  3. [3]

    Journal of Physics: Conference Series3140(4), 042003 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/3140/4/042003

    Chassaing, E., Forest, F., Fink, O., Mielle, M.: Thermoxels: A voxel-based method to generate simulation-ready 3D thermal models. Journal of Physics: Conference Series3140(4), 042003 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/3140/4/042003

    work page doi:10.1088/1742-6596/3140/4/042003 2025

  4. [4]

    Tavares, S., Zhang, J., Ahmed, F.: Offshore wind turbine tower design and optimization: A review and ai-driven future directions

    Alves Ribeiro, J., Alves Ribeiro, B., Pimenta, F., M.O. Tavares, S., Zhang, J., Ahmed, F.: Offshore wind turbine tower design and optimization: A review and ai-driven future directions. Applied Energy397, 126294 (2025) https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.apenergy.2025.126294

    arXiv 2025

  5. [5]

    Engineering Reports7(1), 12837 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1002/eng2.12837

    Von Benzon, H.-H., Chen, X.: Mapping damages from inspection images to3D digital twins oflarge-scalestructures. Engineering Reports7(1), 12837 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1002/eng2.12837

    work page doi:10.1002/eng2.12837 2025

  6. [6]

    Advanced Engineering Informatics65, 103345 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1016/j

    Hassan, M., Forest, F., Fink, O., Mielle, M.: ThermoNeRF: A multimodal Neural Radiance Field for joint RGB-thermal novel view synthesis of building facades. Advanced Engineering Informatics65, 103345 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1016/j. aei.2025.103345

    arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    In: 2024 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA)

    Sun, S., Mielle, M., Lilienthal, A.J., Magnusson, M.: 3QFP: Efficient Neural Implicit Surface Reconstruction Using Tri-Quadtrees and Fourier Feature Positional Encod- ing. In: 2024 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). IEEE, Yokohama, Japan (2024)

    2024

  8. [8]

    ACM Transactions on Graphics42(4), 1–14 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1145/3592433

    Kerbl, B., Kopanas, G., Leimkuehler, T., Drettakis, G.: 3D Gaussian Splatting for Real-Time Radiance Field Rendering. ACM Transactions on Graphics42(4), 1–14 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1145/3592433

    doi:10.1145/3592433 2023

  9. [9]

    In: 2024 IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)

    Sun, S., Mielle, M., Lilienthal, A.J., Magnusson, M.: High-Fidelity SLAM Using Gaussian Splatting with Rendering-Guided Densification and Regularized Opti- mization. In: 2024 IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). IEEE, Abu Dhabi, UAE (2024)

    2024

  10. [10]

    In: ACM SIGGRAPH 2024 Conference Papers

    Jiang, Y., Yu, C., Xie, T., Li, X., Feng, Y., Wang, H., Li, M., Lau, H., Gao, F., Yang, Y., Jiang, C.: VR-GS: A Physical Dynamics-Aware Interactive Gaussian Splatting System in Virtual Reality. In: ACM SIGGRAPH 2024 Conference Papers. 31 SIGGRAPH ’24, p. 1. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2024). https://doi.org/10.1145/3641519.3657448

    arXiv 2024

  11. [11]

    OUP Oxford, Oxford (2007)

    Allaire, G.: Numerical Analysis and Optimization: An Introduction to Mathemat- ical Modelling and Numerical Simulation. OUP Oxford, Oxford (2007)

    2007

  12. [12]

    In: Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques

    Eck, M., Hoppe, H.: Automatic reconstruction of b-spline surfaces of arbitrary topological type. In: Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques. SIGGRAPH ’96, pp. 325–334. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (1996). https://doi.org/10.1145/ 237170.237271 .https://doi.org/10.1145/237170.237271

    arXiv 1996

  13. [13]

    Journal of Computational Science61, 101647 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocs.2022

    Zhu, Z., Zheng, A., Iglesias, A., Wang, S., Xia, Y., Chaudhry, E., You, L., Zhang, J.: Pde patch-based surface reconstruction from point clouds. Journal of Computational Science61, 101647 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocs.2022. 101647

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jocs.2022 2022

  14. [14]

    Finite Elements in Analysis and Design43(15), 1109–1119 (2007) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.finel.2007.06.009

    Chong, C.S., Senthil Kumar, A., Lee, H.P.: Automatic mesh-healing technique for model repair and finite element model generation. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design43(15), 1109–1119 (2007) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.finel.2007.06.009

    work page doi:10.1016/j.finel.2007.06.009 2007

  15. [15]

    Computer-Aided Design29(4), 255–268 (1997) https://doi.org/10

    V´ arady, T., Martin, R.R., Cox, J.: Reverse engineering of geometric models—an introduction. Computer-Aided Design29(4), 255–268 (1997) https://doi.org/10. 1016/S0010-4485(96)00054-1

    1997

  16. [16]

    In: 23rd AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, 2017

    Karman, S., Wyman, N., Steinbrenner, J.: Mesh generation challenges: A com- mercial software perspective. In: 23rd AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, 2017. 23rd AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, 2017. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Inc, AIAA, Denver, CO, USA (2017). https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2017-3790

    work page doi:10.2514/6.2017-3790 2017

  17. [17]

    Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (1997)

    Piegl, L., Tiller, W.: The NURBS Book. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (1997)

    1997

  18. [18]

    Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering194(39), 4135–4195 (2005) https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.cma.2004.10.008

    Hughes, T.J.R., Cottrell, J.A., Bazilevs, Y.: Isogeometric analysis: CAD, finite elements, NURBS, exact geometry and mesh refinement. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering194(39), 4135–4195 (2005) https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.cma.2004.10.008

    doi:10.1016/j.cma.2004.10.008 2005

  19. [19]

    ACM Comput

    Requicha, A.G.: Representations for rigid solids: Theory, methods, and sys- tems. ACM Comput. Surv.12(4), 437–464 (1980) https://doi.org/10.1145/356827. 356833

    work page doi:10.1145/356827 1980

  20. [20]

    Archives of Computa- tional Methods in Engineering25(4), 1059–1127 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11831-017-9220-9

    Marussig, B., Hughes, T.J.R.: A Review of Trimming in Isogeometric Analysis: Challenges, Data Exchange and Simulation Aspects. Archives of Computa- tional Methods in Engineering25(4), 1059–1127 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11831-017-9220-9 . Accessed 2025-11-15

    2018

  21. [21]

    Building and Environment275, 112731 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv

    Xu, C., Mielle, M., Laborde, A., Waseem, A., Forest, F., Fink, O.: Exploiting semantic scene reconstruction for estimating building envelope characteristics. Building and Environment275, 112731 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv. 2025.112731

    arXiv 2025

  22. [22]

    In: Del Bue, A., Canton, C., Pont-Tuset, J., Tommasi, T

    ¨Ozer, M., Weiherer, M., Hundhausen, M., Egger, B.: Exploring Multi-modal Neural Scene Representations With Applications on Thermal Imaging. In: Del Bue, A., Canton, C., Pont-Tuset, J., Tommasi, T. (eds.) Computer Vision – ECCV 2024 Workshops vol. 15626, pp. 82–98. Springer, Cham (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/ 978-3-031-92805-5 6 32

    2024

  23. [23]

    Measurement121, 144–159 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement

    Hiasa, S., Birgul, R., Matsumoto, M., Necati Catbas, F.: Experimental and numer- ical studies for suitable infrared thermography implementation on concrete bridge decks. Measurement121, 144–159 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement. 2018.02.019

    doi:10.1016/j.measurement 2018

  24. [24]

    Fusion Engineering and Design100, 100–111 (2015) https://doi.org/10

    Evans, L.M., Margetts, L., Casalegno, V., Lever, L.M., Bushell, J., Lowe, T., Wallwork, A., Young, P., Lindemann, A., Schmidt, M., Mummery, P.M.: Transient thermal finite element analysis of cfc–cu iter monoblock using x-ray tomography data. Fusion Engineering and Design100, 100–111 (2015) https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.fusengdes.2015.04.048

    2015

  25. [25]

    Journal of Biomechanical Engineering140(12), 121009 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1115/1

    Hou, J.C., Maas, S.A., Weiss, J.A., Ateshian, G.A.: Finite element formulation of multiphasic shell elements for cell mechanics analyses in febio. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering140(12), 121009 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1115/1. 4041043

    doi:10.1115/1 2018

  26. [26]

    Materials & Design27(1), 64–68 (2006) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2004.09.010

    Zhang, Y., Lai, X., Zhu, P., Wang, W.: Lightweight design of automobile component using high strength steel based on dent resistance. Materials & Design27(1), 64–68 (2006) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2004.09.010

    work page doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2004.09.010 2006

  27. [27]

    Solid Mechanics and Its Applications, vol

    Blaauwendraad, J., Hoefakker, J.H.: Structural Shell Analysis: Understanding and Application. Solid Mechanics and Its Applications, vol. 200. Springer, Dordrecht (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6701-0

    work page doi:10.1007/978-94-007-6701-0 2014

  28. [28]

    Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering199(5), 276–289 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2009.05.011

    Benson, D.J., Bazilevs, Y., Hsu, M.C., Hughes, T.J.R.: Isogeometric shell analy- sis: The Reissner–Mindlin shell. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering199(5), 276–289 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2009.05.011

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2009.05.011 2010

  29. [29]

    Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering432, 117407 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.cma.2024.117407

    Guarino, G., Milazzo, A., Buffa, A., Antolin, P.: The immersed boundary conformal method for kirchhoff–love and reissner–mindlin shells. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering432, 117407 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.cma.2024.117407

    arXiv 2024

  30. [30]

    Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering284, 401–457 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2014.09.033

    Breitenberger, M., Apostolatos, A., Philipp, B., W¨ uchner, R., Bletzinger, K.- U.: Analysis in computer aided design: Nonlinear isogeometric b-rep analysis of shell structures. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering284, 401–457 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2014.09.033

    doi:10.1016/j.cma.2014.09.033 2015

  31. [31]

    Engineering with Computers40(5), 3031–3057 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-024-01965-5

    Guarino, G., Antolin, P., Milazzo, A., Buffa, A.: An interior penalty coupling strat- egy for isogeometric non-conformal kirchhoff–love shell patches. Engineering with Computers40(5), 3031–3057 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-024-01965-5

    work page doi:10.1007/s00366-024-01965-5 2024

  32. [32]

    Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering374, 113544 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2020.113544

    Benzaken, J., Evans, J.A., McCormick, S.F., Tamstorf, R.: Nitsche’s method for linear Kirchhoff–Love shells: Formulation, error analysis, and verification. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering374, 113544 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2020.113544

    arXiv 2021

  33. [33]

    part i: experimental investigations

    Hans, S., Boutin, C., Ibraim, E., Roussillon, P.: In situ experiments and seismic analysis of existing buildings. part i: experimental investigations. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics34(12), 1513–1529 (2005) https://doi.org/10. 1002/eqe.502 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/eqe.502

    work page doi:10.1002/eqe.502 2005

  34. [34]

    ACM Transactions on Graphics40(6), 1–13 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3478513.3480501

    Nicolet, B., Jacobson, A., Jakob, W.: Large steps in inverse rendering of geome- try. ACM Transactions on Graphics40(6), 1–13 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3478513.3480501

    arXiv 2021

  35. [35]

    In: ACM SIGGRAPH 2023 Conference Proceedings

    Tancik, M., Weber, E., Ng, E., Li, R., Yi, B., Kerr, J., Wang, T., Kristoffersen, 33 A., Austin, J., Salahi, K., Ahuja, A., McAllister, D., Kanazawa, A.: Nerfstudio: A modular framework for neural radiance field development. In: ACM SIGGRAPH 2023 Conference Proceedings. SIGGRAPH ’23. Association for Computing Machin- ery, New York, NY, USA (2023). https:/...

    arXiv 2023

  36. [36]

    In: Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems

    Wang, P., Liu, L., Liu, Y., Theobalt, C., Komura, T., Wang, W.: NeuS: Learning neural implicit surfaces by volume rendering for multi-view reconstruction. In: Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems. NIPS ’21, pp. 27171–27183. Curran Associates Inc., Red Hook, NY, USA (2021)

    2021

  37. [37]

    Hor´ e, A., Ziou, D.: Image Quality Metrics: PSNR vs. SSIM. In: 2010 20th International Conference on Pattern Recognition, pp. 2366–2369 (2010). https: //doi.org/10.1109/ICPR.2010.579

    doi:10.1109/icpr.2010.579 2010

  38. [38]

    IEEE Transactions on Image Processing13(4), 600–612 (2004) https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2003.819861

    Wang, Z., Bovik, A.C., Sheikh, H.R., Simoncelli, E.P.: Image quality assess- ment: From error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing13(4), 600–612 (2004) https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2003.819861

    arXiv 2004

  39. [39]

    In: 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp

    Zhang, R., Isola, P., Efros, A.A., Shechtman, E., Wang, O.: The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Deep Features as a Perceptual Metric. In: 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 586–595. IEEE, Salt Lake City, UT (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2018.00068

    arXiv 2018

  40. [40]

    ACM Transactions on Graphics42(6), 1–18 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1145/3618387

    Worchel, M., Alexa, M.: Differentiable Rendering of Parametric Geometry. ACM Transactions on Graphics42(6), 1–18 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1145/3618387

    work page doi:10.1145/3618387 2023

  41. [41]

    ACM Trans

    Sederberg, T.W., Zheng, J., Bakenov, A., Nasri, A.: T-splines and T-NURCCs. ACM Trans. Graph.22(3), 477–484 (2003) https://doi.org/10.1145/882262.882295

    arXiv 2003

  42. [42]

    Computer Aided Geometric Design29(7), 485–498 (2012) https://doi

    Giannelli, J¨ uttler, Speleers: THB-splines: The truncated basis for hierarchical splines. Computer Aided Geometric Design29(7), 485–498 (2012) https://doi. org/10.1016/j.cagd.2012.03.025

    doi:10.1016/j.cagd.2012.03.025 2012

  43. [43]

    https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2603.18774

    Skorokhodov, V., Xu, C., Sun, S., Fink, O., Mielle, M.: SEAR: Simple and Efficient Adaptation of Visual Geometric Transformers for RGB+Thermal 3D Reconstruction (2026). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2603.18774 . https://arxiv. org/abs/2603.18774

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2603.18774 2026

  44. [44]

    IEEE Transactions on Robotics37(6), 1874–1890 (2021) https://doi.org/ 10.1109/TRO.2021.3075644

    Campos, C., Elvira, R., Rodr ´ ıguez, J.J.G., Montiel, J.M.M., Tard´ os, J.D.: ORB- SLAM3: An accurate open-source library for visual, visual-inertial, and multimap SLAM. IEEE Transactions on Robotics37(6), 1874–1890 (2021) https://doi.org/ 10.1109/TRO.2021.3075644

    arXiv 2021

  45. [45]

    IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics14(1), 213–230 (2008) https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2007.1054

    Botsch, M., Sorkine, O.: On linear variational surface deformation methods. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics14(1), 213–230 (2008) https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2007.1054

    arXiv 2008

  46. [46]

    SIGGRAPH Comput

    Nishita, T., Sederberg, T.W., Kakimoto, M.: Ray tracing trimmed rational surface patches. SIGGRAPH Comput. Graph.24(4), 337–345 (1990) https://doi.org/10. 1145/97880.97916

    arXiv 1990

  47. [47]

    ACM Trans

    L´ evy, B., Petitjean, S., Ray, N., Maillot, J.: Least squares conformal maps for automatic texture atlas generation. ACM Trans. Graph.21(3), 362–371 (2002) https://doi.org/10.1145/566654.566590

    arXiv 2002

  48. [48]

    Transactions on Graphics (Proceedings of SIGGRAPH Asia)42(6) (2023) https://doi.org/10.1145/3618385

    Zhang, Z., Roussel, N., Jakob, W.: Projective sampling for differentiable rendering 34 of geometry. Transactions on Graphics (Proceedings of SIGGRAPH Asia)42(6) (2023) https://doi.org/10.1145/3618385

    doi:10.1145/3618385 2023

  49. [49]

    Liu, D.C., Nocedal, J.: On the limited memory bfgs method for large scale optimization. Math. Program.45(1–3), 503–528 (1989)

    1989

  50. [50]

    Oxford Science Publications

    Willmore, T.J.: Riemannian Geometry. Oxford Science Publications. Clarendon Press, Oxford (1993)

    1993

  51. [51]

    Springer, New York (1993)

    Stoer, J., Bulirsch, R., Bartels, R., Gautschi, W., Witzgall, C.: Introduction to Numerical Analysis. Springer, New York (1993)

    1993

  52. [52]

    ACM Trans

    Laine, S., Hellsten, J., Karras, T., Seol, Y., Lehtinen, J., Aila, T.: Modular primitives for high-performance differentiable rendering. ACM Trans. Graph.39(6) (2020) https://doi.org/10.1145/3414685.3417861

    arXiv 2020

  53. [53]

    In: The Thirty-Seventh Asilomar Conference on Signals, Sys- tems & Computers, 2003, vol

    Wang, Z., Simoncelli, E.P., Bovik, A.C.: Multiscale structural similarity for image quality assessment. In: The Thirty-Seventh Asilomar Conference on Signals, Sys- tems & Computers, 2003, vol. 2, pp. 1398–1402. IEEE, Pacific Grove, CA, USA (2003). https://doi.org/10.1109/ACSSC.2003.1292216

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  54. [54]

    In: International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) (2015)

    Kingma, D.P., Ba, J.: Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. In: International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) (2015). https://arxiv.org/abs/1412.6980

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  55. [55]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pp

    Valentin, J.P.C., Sengupta, S., Warrell, J., Shahrokni, A., Torr, P.H.S.: Mesh based semantic modelling for indoor and outdoor scenes. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pp. 2067–2074 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2013.269

    work page doi:10.1109/cvpr.2013.269 2067

  56. [56]

    In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), pp

    Kundu, A., Yin, X., Fathi, A., Ross, D., Brewington, B., Funkhouser, T., Pantofaru, C.: Virtual multi-view fusion for 3D semantic segmentation. In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), pp. 518–535 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58586-0 31

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-58586-0 2020

  57. [57]

    Sensors 18(7) (2018) https://doi.org/10.3390/s18072003

    Yang, M.-D., Su, T.-C., Lin, H.-Y.: Fusion of infrared thermal image and visible image for 3D thermal model reconstruction using smartphone sensors. Sensors 18(7) (2018) https://doi.org/10.3390/s18072003

    work page doi:10.3390/s18072003 2018

  58. [58]

    Jakob, W., Speierer, S., Roussel, N., Nimier-David, M., Vicini, D., Zeltner, T., Nicolet, B., Crespo, M., Leroy, V., Zhang, Z.: Mitsuba 3 renderer (2022)

    2022

  59. [60]

    arXiv (2025)

    Carion, N., Gustafson, L., Hu, Y.-T., Debnath, S., Hu, R., Suris, D., Ryali, C., Alwala, K.V., Khedr, H., Huang, A., Lei, J., Ma, T., Guo, B., Kalla, A., Marks, M., Greer, J., Wang, M., Sun, P., R¨ adle, R., Afouras, T., Mavroudi, E., Xu, K., Wu, T.-H., Zhou, Y., Momeni, L., Hazra, R., Ding, S., Vaze, S., Porcher, F., Li, F., Li, S., Kamath, A., Cheng, H....

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.16719 2025

  60. [61]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2025) 35

    Wang, J., Chen, M., Karaev, N., Vedaldi, A., Rupprecht, C., Novotny, D.: Vggt: Visual geometry grounded transformer. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2025) 35

    2025

  61. [62]

    Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 284, 807–834 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2014.11.008

    Ded` e, L., Quarteroni, A.: Isogeometric analysis for second order partial differential equations on surfaces. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 284, 807–834 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2014.11.008

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2014.11.008 2015

  62. [63]

    Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society43(1), 50–67 (1947) https: //doi.org/10.1017/S0305004100023197

    Crank, J., Nicolson, P.: A practical method for numerical evaluation of solu- tions of partial differential equations of the heat-conduction type. Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society43(1), 50–67 (1947) https: //doi.org/10.1017/S0305004100023197

    doi:10.1017/s0305004100023197 1947

  63. [64]

    Zenodo (2023)

    Baratta, I.A., Dean, J.P., Dokken, J.S., Habera, M., Hale, J.S., Richardson, C.N., Rognes, M.E., Scroggs, M.W., Sime, N., Wells, G.N.: DOLFINx: The next generation FEniCS problem solving environment. Zenodo (2023). https: //doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10447666 . https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10447666

    doi:10.5281/zenodo.10447666 2023

  64. [65]

    International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering22(3), 697–722 (1986) https://doi.org/10.1002/nme

    Bathe, K.-J., Dvorkin, E.N.: A formulation of general shell elements—the use of mixed interpolation of tensorial components. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering22(3), 697–722 (1986) https://doi.org/10.1002/nme. 1620220312 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/nme.1620220312

    doi:10.1002/nme 1986

  65. [66]

    Computational Mechanics65(5), 1323–1341 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00466-020-01821-5

    Hu, Q., Xia, Y., Natarajan, S., Zilian, A., Hu, P., Bordas, S.P.A.: Isogeometric analysis of thin Reissner–Mindlin shells: locking phenomena and B-bar method. Computational Mechanics65(5), 1323–1341 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00466-020-01821-5

    2020

  66. [67]

    Journal of Sound and Vibration626, 119615 (2026) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2025

    Guarino, G., Voet, Y., Antolin, P., Buffa, A.: A stabilization technique for immer- sogeometric analysis of plate and shell problems in explicit dynamics. Journal of Sound and Vibration626, 119615 (2026) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2025. 119615

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jsv.2025 2026

  67. [68]

    Nature Methods17, 261–272 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T.E., Haberland, M., Reddy, T., Courna- peau, D., Burovski, E., Peterson, P., Weckesser, W., Bright, J., van der Walt, S.J., Brett, M., Wilson, J., Millman, K.J., Mayorov, N., Nelson, A.R.J., Jones, E., Kern, R., Larson, E., Carey, C.J., Polat, ˙I., Feng, Y., Moore, E.W., VanderPlas, J., Lax- alde, D., Perktold, J., Ci...

    2020

  68. [69]

    ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software (TOMS)35(3), 1–14 (2008) https://doi.org/10.1145/ 1391989.1391995

    Chen, Y., Davis, T.A., Hager, W.W., Rajamanickam, S.: Algorithm 887: Cholmod, supernodal sparse cholesky factorization and update/downdate. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software (TOMS)35(3), 1–14 (2008) https://doi.org/10.1145/ 1391989.1391995

    arXiv 2008

  69. [70]

    https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10976214

    Developers, T.: Scikit-sparse. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10976214 . https: //doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10976214

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.10976214

  70. [71]

    Jakob, W., Speierer, S., Roussel, N., Vicini, D.: Dr.jit: A just-in-time compiler for differentiable rendering. Transactions on Graphics (Proceedings of SIGGRAPH) 41(4) (2022) https://doi.org/10.1145/3528223.3530099 36 Supplementary Materials Spline-Based Boundary Representations for Sparse View Reconstruction and Simulation Using Isogeometric Analysis 1 ...

    arXiv 2022

  71. [72]

    In particular,a < x1 <· · ·< xnq < b

    Nodes inside[ a, b]: Quadrature nodes lie entirely inside of the interval [ a, b]. In particular,a < x1 <· · ·< xnq < b

  72. [73]

    Positive weights: The quadrature weights are strictly positive, i.e., wi > 0,∀i∈ {1, . . . , nq}. 3.Polynomial exactness: Polynomials of degree up to 2n q −1 are integrated exactly

  73. [74]

    This assumes that the 2 nq-th derivative of f is well-defined, otherwise the formula does not hold

    High-order convergence: If the function f cannot be integrated exactly, then the error depends on the size of the integration interval and the 2 nq-th derivative of f : I(f)−I nq G (f) = f (2nq)(ξ) (2nq)! Z b a nqY i=1 (x−x i)2 dx,(S11) for some ξ∈ (a, b). This assumes that the 2 nq-th derivative of f is well-defined, otherwise the formula does not hold

  74. [75]

    not seen

    Spectral convergence for analytic functions: If f is analytic on interval [ a, b] and in its complex neighborhood, then the error decays geometrically as Cρ −2nq , where C is a constant that depends on the interval length and f , while ρ >1 depends on the size of the complex neighborhood (Bernstein ellipse) in whichfis analytic. The polynomial exactness p...

  75. [76]

    Partition of unity: the sum of basis functions at a given ξ equals 1 for all ξ∈ [ξ1, ξn+p+1]

  76. [77]

    Compact support: each basis function Ni,p(ξ) is non-zero on ξ∈ [ξi, ξi+p+1] and zero elsewhere

  77. [78]

    Cubic B-spline basis functions for a uniform open knot vector with 4 knot spans are shown in Fig

    Non-negativity:N i,p ≥0,∀ξ∈ [ξ1, ξn+p+1]. Cubic B-spline basis functions for a uniform open knot vector with 4 knot spans are shown in Fig. S1. Observe that there are at most p + 1 non-zero (active) basis functions in a particular knot span and that each basis function is locally supported (non-zero) on at most p + 1 knot spans (see Fig. S2). Two basis fu...

  78. [79]

    The tolerance should be at least 2 orders of magnitude lower than the expected accuracy with tol = 10 −7 being a reasonable value

    The last iterate is then taken as the correct solution cj+1 =(kmax) cj+1. The tolerance should be at least 2 orders of magnitude lower than the expected accuracy with tol = 10 −7 being a reasonable value. The system can be solved either with direct or iterative solvers. The left-hand side (LHS) matrixM+ ∆ tj/2Ais a sparse, symmetric positive-definite (SPD...

  79. [80]

    for a complete derivation in the Appendices. For modal analysis, we set f 3D = 0 and seek harmonic solutions v(y, t) = v(y)eiωt, reducing the problem to the generalized eigenvalue problem Kϕ=λMϕ,(S55) whereKis the shell stiffness matrix,Mis the mass matrix, λ = ω2 are the squared angular natural frequencies ( ω = 2πf ), and ϕ are the mode shapes. For a fr...

  80. [81]

    Hot frac

    The strain measures are expressed coordinate-free through the surface normal ˆn and the tangential projectorI −ˆnˆnT , and are constructed to vanish exactly on rigid 63 body motions, preserving the six zero modes even on faceted geometry. The plane- stress constitutive relations, the shear correction factor κs = 5/6, the objective drilling penalty (with a...

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 1, 2026.