Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 57 references

A Research Prototype for Closed-Loop Generative Design of Customized Foot Orthoses via Semantic-Physics Alignment

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A closed-loop generative pipeline maps clinical text to 3D printable foot orthoses, using a GNN stress surrogate to predict a 34.7% peak-pressure reduction over parametric CAD.

desk verdict Honest, well-scoped engineering prototype; the 34.7% headline is surrogate-on-surrogate and should be treated as provisional until an independent FEA run confirms it. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.16631 v1 pith:DKVQZUP4 submitted 2026-07-18 cs.AI

Rui Wang , Byungwon Min , Suxing Liu This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.AI
keywords footorthosesgenerativedesigngraphneuralnetworkssemantic-physicsalignmentlatticestructuresplantarpressurefiniteelementsurrogateclosed-loop
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper sets out to solve a 'semantic-physics misalignment' in foot orthosis design: clinical prescriptions like 'offload the first metatarsal head' are not deterministically mapped to 3D geometry, so design remains manual and slow. It presents TANS-FO, a modular pipeline in which a text-aligned neural surrogate projects clinical text onto a lattice-density field, and a graph neural network predicts plantar stress in real time, closing the loop. On the Male 18–40 cohort, the system is reported to achieve a surrogate-predicted peak-pressure reduction of 34.7% over parametric CAD, a fit error of 0.42 mm, and a design-to-validation time of about 52 seconds. The GNN surrogate matches an Abaqus reference solver with R²=0.94 under quasi-static loading. The authors are explicit that these are computational surrogate results, not clinical outcomes, and the device is a research prototype.

What carries the argument

The Text-Aligned Neural Surrogate (TANS) is the central object: a cross-attention mechanism that projects a 512-dimensional clinical-text embedding (from a BioBERT-based parser) onto a 128-dimensional per-node field over the orthotic mesh, with dimensions 1–64 encoding offloading intensity, 65–96 support stiffness, and 97–128 boundary smoothness, which together determine local Gyroid lattice density. The second pillar is the GNN surrogate — a 4-layer graph attention network with 4 heads, operating on ~12,000-node mesh graphs — which predicts node-level stress in real time, substituting for FEA. Its output feeds back through an alignment loss to modulate the embedding, closing the loop; a hum

What would settle it

Run the final TANS-FO STL designs through Abaqus (or instrumented in-shoe pressure mapping) on the same 50-subject male 18–40 cohort and compare peak pressure against the parametric CAD baseline; if the observed reduction falls far below 34.7% or the fit error exceeds ~0.42 mm, the central claim fails. The paper does not perform this check.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that semantic-physics alignment can be achieved by a cross-attention layer that maps clinical-text embeddings to a 128-dimensional nodal field encoding offloading intensity, support stiffness, and boundary smoothness, which in turn modulates Gyroid lattice relative density. With a graph attention network providing near-instant stress predictions, the generative loop can be closed in minutes, and the resulting designs show a surrogate-predicted 34.7% peak-pressure reduction over parametric CAD on the male 18–40 cohort, with a fit error of 0.42 mm and GNN–Abaqus agreement of R²=0.94. If correct, this means the manual, expert-dependent translation from prescription to ortho

Load-bearing premise

The final performance figures rest on the assumption that the GNN surrogate's predicted stress fields are accurate enough to certify the 34.7% peak-pressure reduction; the optimized designs were not re-run through full FEA, and the GNN is known to underestimate peak stress in high-curvature regions by 2–4%.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Design-to-validation time per orthosis drops from hours or days to roughly 52 seconds on a modern GPU, allowing rapid exploration of alternative clinical directives.
  • Adding GNN feedback improved fit error on the male 18–40 cohort from 1.24 mm to 0.42 mm and peak-pressure reduction from 21.4% to 34.7%, showing the closed-loop surrogate meaningfully guides the generator.
  • The random-text ablation shows the alignment is not an artifact of anatomical priors alone: corrupting the clinical text degrades performance to near baseline, so the semantic signal is doing real work.
  • The pipeline outputs a manufacturing-ready STL of a TPU lattice insole, so a fabricated-device workflow is, in principle, a direct next step, subject to the human review gate.
  • Because the GNN surrogate runs in seconds, final designs can still be routed to a high-fidelity FEA for verification, separating exploration from certification.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If an independent Abaqus re-run of the final designs confirms a comparable offloading gain, the same closed-loop architecture could be transplanted to other patient-specific devices — ankle-foot orthoses, insoles for offloading diabetic ulcers — where the text-to-geometry mapping problem is analogous.
  • The reported 34.7% is a surrogate-predicted number; the paper does not re-run final designs through FEA. Until that check is done, readers should treat the figure as an upper-bound estimate of the real-world offloading gain.
  • The GNN's systematic 2–4% underestimation of peak stress at high-curvature regions suggests that for high-risk patients (e.g., diabetic foot), the surrogate should be paired with a safety margin or mandatory FEA verification; the paper's human-in-the-loop gate is a start but not a quantitative safety factor.
  • The PicoFoot-5K dataset omits children under 15, BMI>35, and severe deformities — precisely the populations most likely to need custom orthoses. Applying the pipeline to those groups would test whether the alignment generalizes beyond the training distribution.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents TANS-FO, a modular research-prototype pipeline that translates unstructured clinical text into customized foot-orthosis geometry. The system couples a Text-Aligned Neural Surrogate (TANS) that projects clinical-text embeddings onto a lattice-density field with a Graph Neural Network (GNN) surrogate that predicts plantar stress in real time under quasi-static loading. The authors report a GNN-vs-Abaqus agreement of R²=0.942 on 500 foot meshes, a surrogate-predicted peak-pressure reduction of 34.7% over parametric CAD on the Male 18–40 cohort, a fit error of 0.42 mm, and an exploratory two-week VAS observation (n=12, 6.4→2.1). The paper is explicitly framed as a design-support prototype, not a clinically validated device, with human-in-the-loop review and regulatory clearance explicitly disclaimed.

Significance. If the surrogate-based performance gains survive independent FEA verification, this work would represent a useful contribution to automated orthotic design: it offers a reproducible open dataset (PicoFoot-5K), open-sourced code and weights, and a surrogate that is externally benchmarked against Abaqus. The authors are commendably transparent about the quasi-static scope, the exploratory nature of the clinical observation, and the need for FEA verification before fabrication. However, the central quantitative claim—the 34.7% peak-pressure reduction—is currently supported only by the same GNN that is used to select the designs, which is a significant validation gap.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4.1.4, Table 5, Algorithm 1, Eqs. (2)–(4)] The headline 34.7% peak-pressure reduction is computed with the same GNN surrogate that is used to select the optimized designs in the closed loop (Algorithm 1, steps 4–11; Eqs. (2)–(4)). The paper’s own error analysis (§4.1.4) states that the GNN underestimates peak stress in high-curvature regions by 2–4%. If the optimized TANS-FO lattice orthoses contain more high-curvature features (e.g., density gradients, strut intersections) than the generic test meshes, the surrogate’s systematic under-prediction would disproportionately reduce the predicted peak pressure for TANS-FO designs, potentially inflating the reported 13.3-point improvement over the parametric CAD baseline. No final optimized design is re-run through Abaqus or experimentally measured; the limitation section (§5) states that final designs should be FEA-verified before fabrication, but this verification is not performed fo
  2. [§4.1.2, §4.1.4] The R²=0.942 external validation of the GNN surrogate is carried out on 'an independent test mesh set of 500 irregular foot models' (§4.1.2), not on the distribution of TANS-FO-generated orthoses (lattice structures with spatially varying density). Thus the surrogate’s accuracy in the actual design space of the pipeline is not established. To support the central claim, the authors need to validate the surrogate on a holdout set of TANS-FO outputs using Abaqus ground truth, or at least demonstrate that the 500 test meshes are representative of the optimized designs in terms of curvature, lattice density, and mesh topology. Without this, the external benchmark does not transfer to the reported 34.7% reduction.
  3. [§4.2, Table 4] The ablation study compares TANS-FO with and without GNN feedback, but the 'Peak Press. Red.' column is, per the table note and §5, surrogate-predicted. If the same GNN is used to evaluate both the full system and the 'w/o GNN' variant, the ablation may be circular: the improvement attributed to the GNN feedback could partly reflect the surrogate reporting lower pressures for designs it selected itself, given its documented high-curvature underestimation. The authors should clarify which evaluator is used for each row and, ideally, re-evaluate the ablated variants with independent FEA to confirm the 34.7% vs 21.4% difference is not an artifact of the surrogate’s bias.
  4. [§3.6, Eq. (4)] The 'semantic-physics alignment' loss L_align measures a learned distance between a text-embedding projection (F_proj) and a learned function of GNN stress outputs (G_attn). This is an embedding-space alignment, not a physics-based constraint; the phrase 'rigorous semantic-physics alignment' overstates the physical grounding. The GNN surrogate itself is trained on Abaqus data, but the alignment loss itself does not encode any continuum-mechanics law. This is a terminology/scope issue rather than a fatal flaw, but the claims should be calibrated to what is actually achieved.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§4.1.4] The paragraph 'GNN error spatial pattern' appears twice verbatim. Please remove the duplicate.
  2. [Table 5 note] The 'Time (s)' column compares computation-only time for TANS-FO with time that includes physical fabrication steps for manual/CAD baselines. This makes the time comparison misleading; the table note acknowledges it, but the column header should be labeled more explicitly (e.g., 'compute time' vs 'total workflow time').
  3. [§4.1.2] The text states that meshes were 'voxelized at a resolution of 1.0 mm,' but the GNN operates on an irregular graph. Clarify whether voxelization is used only for preprocessing/augmentation or as an intermediate representation that conflicts with the graph abstraction.
  4. [§4.1.4] The error figures are stated as 'up to 4.8%' and '2–4%' underestimation in high-curvature regions. These should be reconciled and reported with confidence intervals, as the directional bias is central to the validation concern.
  5. [References] Several references are incomplete (e.g., ref. 22 lacks volume/page numbers; refs. 32 and 33 have inconsistent formatting). Please check against the journal style.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Headline 34.7% reduction and the 'semantic-physics alignment' claim are self-evaluated: the GNN selects the design and then scores it, and the alignment loop can edit the clinical embedding to satisfy its own metric.

  1. fitted input called prediction [§4.1.4 Performance Analysis; Table 5 note; Algorithm 1 Steps 3–4 (lines 7–11)]
    "All pressure reduction figures are surrogate-predicted under quasi-static loading unless otherwise noted. ... On the Male (18–40) cohort, TANS-FO achieves a Peak Pressure Reduction of 34.7% ... s_v ← GNN-Surrogate(G_mesh) ... AlignmentScore ≤ Threshold ⇒ e_s ← AttentionModulation(e_s, L_align)."

    The closed loop (Algorithm 1) generates designs and accepts/rejects them based on the GNN's predicted stress; the reported 34.7% is the GNN's prediction for the design that the loop selected by minimizing that same prediction. Thus the headline number is the optimizer's objective value, not an independent measurement. The only external anchor, R²=0.942, is on 'an independent test mesh set of 500 irregular foot models' (§4.1.2), not on optimized TANS-FO lattice designs; the paper itself notes the GNN 'tends to slightly underestimate peak stress in high-curvature regions ... by 2–4%' and says final designs 'should always be verified by a high-fidelity FEA solver before fabrication' (§4.1.4, §5), yet no such verification is reported for the 34.7% result. The reduction is therefore a self-asse

  2. self definitional [§3.6 Eq. (4); Algorithm 1 Step 4 (lines 9–11)]
    "Lalign = ||Fproj(es) − Gattn(sv)||² + γLreg ... AlignmentScore ≤ Threshold ⇒ es ← AttentionModulation(es, Lalign)."

    Lalign compares a projection of the clinical embedding with a density field derived from the GNN's stress prediction. When the threshold is not met, the loop edits es itself, so the 'clinical intent' becomes a free parameter adjusted to make the surrogate's output match. This means the semantic-physics alignment metric can be satisfied by redefining the input rather than by physically improving the design. The claimed alignment is thus internal consistency of the pipeline's own networks, not an independent verification that the original prescription was realized.

full rationale

The paper is unusually transparent: it labels itself a research prototype, calls the reduction 'surrogate-predicted', and states that all performance figures come from computational surrogates and/or subjective feedback (§5, Limitations). There is genuine external grounding for the surrogate itself (R²=0.942 against Abaqus on 500 generic foot models), which prevents a pure definitional tautology and keeps the score from being 8–10. Nevertheless, the headline 34.7% is generated and evaluated by the same GNN that the loop optimizes, and the alignment loss can be minimized by editing the clinical embedding. These are concrete reductions of the central claims to the system's own inputs/objective, so the score is 6 rather than 0–2.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claims rest on a trained GNN surrogate, a self-created database, and the assumption that quasi-static simulation is a meaningful design target. There are no first-principles derivations or physical conservation laws in the surrogate; the paper explicitly notes that the GNN does not encode force balance or constitutive relations (Section 3.4).

free parameters (6)
  • Regularization scale γ in L_align = 0.15
    Eq. (4); fixed ad hoc to balance alignment and density smoothness; part of the central alignment loss.
  • Eikonal weight λ_eik = 0.1
    Eq. (5); fixed ad hoc for the signed-distance-field gradient constraint.
  • Lattice density bounds = [0.15, 0.75]
    Section 3.6; chosen by hand to constrain Gyroid relative density and affects the synthesized geometry.
  • GNN architecture hyperparameters = 4 layers, 4 heads, hidden dim 128
    Section 3.4 and implementation details; no sensitivity analysis is reported.
  • Training hyperparameters = lr=5e-4, batch=32, 100 epochs
    Implementation details; chosen without a reported tuning procedure.
  • Trained weights of TANS and GNN surrogates = not reported numerically; repo link
    The 34.7% figure and R²=0.942 are outputs of these fitted models; their weights are the actual free parameters behind the central claims.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Quasi-static loading at mid-stance is a sufficient proxy for orthotic performance
    All pressure-reduction claims are computed under static mid-stance loading; the paper itself states this is not a conservative bound for dynamic gait loads (Section 3.5).
  • domain assumption The Abaqus finite-element model is ground truth for plantar stress
    GNN R²=0.94 is measured against Abaqus; no experimental pressure data is used to validate either Abaqus or the GNN (Section 4.1.2).
  • ad hoc to paper Text embedding es can be deterministically projected to density-modulation coefficients
    F_proj is a learned MLP in Eq. (4); the paper provides no principled reason that semantic features map one-to-one to density coefficients.
  • standard math Standard GAT message-passing and SDF/Eikonal losses remain valid on non-uniform medical meshes
    Uses published GAT [36] and DeepSDF [27] formulations; no formal verification of applicability to orthotic meshes is provided.
  • domain assumption PicoFoot-5K is representative of clinical populations
    Cohort statistics are self-reported; no independent sample or external validation of the distribution is presented (Section 3.2).
  • domain assumption TPU FDM printed lattice behaves as simulated in Abaqus/GNN
    Material properties, print defects, and boundary conditions are not experimentally validated (Section 3.3).
invented entities (1)
  • TANS cross-attention semantic-physics alignment
    purpose: Projects clinical text embeddings onto lattice-density fields and closes the loop with stress predictions via Eq. (4).
    No independent falsifiable handle: the mapping is defined and evaluated only within this paper's pipeline and dataset.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Research Prototype for Closed-Loop Generative Design of Customized Foot Orthoses via Semantic-Physics Alignment." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DKVQZUP4

@misc{pith2026260716631,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Research Prototype for Closed-Loop Generative Design of Customized Foot Orthoses via Semantic-Physics Alignment},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DKVQZUP4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.16631}
}
read the original abstract

Translating unstructured clinical prescriptions into patient-specific foot orthoses (FOs) is hindered by a semantic-physical misalignment: high-level clinical intent is not mapped deterministically onto the 3D geometric parameters of the orthosis, and existing design workflows remain dependent on manual expertise with no instantaneous biomechanical validation. We present TANS-FO, a research prototype-a modular pipeline with closed-loop feedback for computational design automation of customized FOs, not a clinically validated therapeutic device. A Text-Aligned Neural Surrogate (TANS) uses cross-attention to project clinical-text embeddings onto a continuous lattice-density field, while a Graph Neural Network (GNN) surrogate predicts plantar stress in real time as a substitute for Finite Element Analysis (FEA). The framework is anchored on the open-access PicoFoot-5K anthropometric database (5,230 subjects; 30+ anatomical parameters). Under standardized quasi-static loading, the GNN surrogate agrees with an Abaqus reference solver (R^2 = 0.94), and the full pipeline synthesizes manufacturing-ready lattice insoles within minutes. On the Male 18-40 cohort, the proposed system attains a surrogate-predicted peak-pressure reduction of 34.7% over parametric CAD, with a fit error of 0.42 mm. Separately, an exploratory feasibility observation (n = 12; 2-week follow-up; no control group) using VAS pain reporting indicates short-term comfort improvement (VAS 6.4 -> 2.1), but this data is explicitly classified as preliminary observational evidence only-not evidence of clinical efficacy.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.16631 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Overall framework pipeline of the proposed TANS-FO research prototype, comprising deep clinical intent parsing, anthropometric prior data matching, multi-stage generative design loop, and real-time physics-informed surrogate validation under quasi-static loading conditions. 3. Methodology In this section, we present the overall framework of TANS-FO, a modular pipeline with closed-loop feedback designed for the autom… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    semantic-physics misalignment

    Introduction Foot health is a central element of human mobility and physiological well-being; however, common structural foot deformities—notably hallux valgus, which affects an estimated 23% of adults aged 18–65 years and over 35% of those older than 65 [ 1], and pes planus (flatfoot)—frequently contribute to gait instability and chronic musculoskeletal ...

    arXiv 2026

  2. [2]

    trial-and-error

    Related Work 2.1. Generative Design and Lattice Optimization in Orthotics The integration of Additive Manufacturing (AM) has revolutionized the fabrication of rehabilitation devices, moving from uniform solid structures to topologically optimized porous geometries [13]. Generative design frameworks, particularly those utilizing Triply Periodic Minimal Sur...

    2026

  3. [3]

    semantic-physics align- ment,

    Methodology In this section, we present the overall framework of TANS-FO, a modular pipeline with closed-loop feedback designed for the automated generative design of customized foot orthoses. The proposed architecture integrates four key components: (1) clinical intent parsing and anthropometric data matching, (2) multi-stage generative coordination via ...

    2026

  4. [4]

    Clinical Trust

    Experiment Table 1.Correlation matrix of key anatomical parameters from the database and their impact on quasi-static biomechanics. Anatomical Feature Correlation with Peak Pressure Biomechanical Relevance Measurement Reliability Metatarsal Circumference 0.78 High 0.94 Arch Height (Navicular) 0.85 Critical 0.96 Hallux Valgus Angle 0.64 Moderate 0.91 Heel ...

    2026

  5. [5]

    However, several important caveats must be empha- sized

    Discussion The results presented above demonstrate that TANS-FO can produce customized foot orthoses with improved surrogate-validated performance metrics compared to existing CAD-based and manual workflows. However, several important caveats must be empha- sized. First, all performance figures (peak pressure reduction, fit error, satisfaction score) are ...

  6. [6]

    Conclusion This paper presents TANS-FO, a modular pipeline with closed-loop feedback for the computational design automation of customized foot orthoses. The system adapts multi- stage coordination with a Text-Aligned Neural Surrogate (TANS) and a physics-informed GNN surrogate layer to bridge the gap between qualitative clinical prescriptions and quantit...

    2026

  7. [7]

    Limitations The current work has several limitations that should be acknowledged. First, the GNN surrogate is trained and validated under quasi-static loading conditions; dynamic gait phases (heel strike, mid-stance, toe-off) are not modeled, so the reported peak-pressure reduction reflects static equilibrium rather than cyclic loading. Second, the explor...

  8. [8]

    The TANS-FO pipeline scripts and trained inference weights are open-sourced at https://github.com/HAHA1122344/tans-fo-orthotics

    Data Availability Statement The PicoFoot-5K anthropometric dataset is available at https://www.kaggle.com/ datasets/doucetbenton/picofoot-5k. The TANS-FO pipeline scripts and trained inference weights are open-sourced at https://github.com/HAHA1122344/tans-fo-orthotics

Show all 57 references
  1. [9]

    Ethics Statement The PicoFoot-5K database consists of de-identified anthropometric measurements collected as part of a routine orthotic design workflow; no prospective human-subjects research protocol was conducted for this retrospective compilation, and no Institutional Re- v...

  2. [10]

    The remaining authors declare no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have influenced the work reported in this paper

    Conflicts of Interest Rui Wang is employed by Shanghai Artificial Intelligence Generative Design Tech- nology Co., Ltd. The remaining authors declare no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have influenced the work reported in this paper. Th...

    2026

  3. [11]

    Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, com- mercial, or not-for-profit sectors

  4. [12]

    All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript

    Author Contributions Conceptualization: Rui Wang and LIU SUXING; Methodology: Rui Wang, BYUNG- WON MIN, and LIU SUXING; Software: Rui Wang; Validation: BYUNGWON MIN and LIU SUXING; Formal analysis: Rui Wang and LIU SUXING; Investigation: BYUNGWON MIN and LIU SUXING; Data curat...

  5. [13]

    A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Prevalence of Hallux Valgus in the General Population.Cureus2023,15, e42739

    Alkhalifah, Y.; Almotiri, N.; Alharbi, M. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Prevalence of Hallux Valgus in the General Population.Cureus2023,15, e42739. https: //doi.org/10.7759/cureus.42739

    doi

  6. [14]

    Does Foot Shape Really Matter? Correlation of Patient- Reported Outcomes with Radiographic Parameters.Foot and Ankle Surgery2024,30, 202–208

    Poutoglidou, F.; Marsland, D.; Elliot, D. Does Foot Shape Really Matter? Correlation of Patient- Reported Outcomes with Radiographic Parameters.Foot and Ankle Surgery2024,30, 202–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fas.2024.03.004

    2024 doi

  7. [15]

    Achilles Tendinopathy Management: A Single-Blinded Placebo- Controlled Multicentre Trial.Physiotherapy2022,114, 1–10

    Kearney, R.S.; Parsons, S.; Ji, H. Achilles Tendinopathy Management: A Single-Blinded Placebo- Controlled Multicentre Trial.Physiotherapy2022,114, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physio.20 21.12.293

    doi

  8. [16]

    Advancing Ankle–Foot Orthosis Design through Biome- chanics, Robotics, and Additive Manufacturing

    Kumar, S.; Gupta, R.; Pratihar, D.K. Advancing Ankle–Foot Orthosis Design through Biome- chanics, Robotics, and Additive Manufacturing. InBiomedical Robots and Devices in Healthcare; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands,2025; pp. 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-443-2 2206...

    2025 doi

  9. [17]

    Flexible Lattice Structure Using Curved Struts Based on Body-Centered Cubic Structure Fabricated by Additive Manufacturing.Additive Manufacturing 2025,96, 104746

    Sasagawa, N.; Nimura, T.; Tanaka, S. Flexible Lattice Structure Using Curved Struts Based on Body-Centered Cubic Structure Fabricated by Additive Manufacturing.Additive Manufacturing 2025,96, 104746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2025.104746

    2025

  10. [18]

    New Technologies—3D Scanning, 3D Design, and 3D Printing in Footwear Customization

    Luximon, A.; Luximon, Y. New Technologies—3D Scanning, 3D Design, and 3D Printing in Footwear Customization. InHandbook of Footwear Design and Manufacturing; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA,2021; pp. 337–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-821606-4.00019-3

    2021 doi

  11. [19]

    The Impact of Digital Technology on Footwear Design and Manufacturing

    Jing, Y.; Ye, X.; Zhu, L. The Impact of Digital Technology on Footwear Design and Manufacturing. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Computer Technology, Electronics and Communication (CTCEC), Wuhan, China, 23–25 July 2021; pp. 248–252. https://doi.org/10.11...

    2021

  12. [20]

    Deep Learning Based Synthesis of MRI, CT and PET: Review and Analysis.Medical Image Analysis2024,91, 103042

    Dayarathna, K.; Islam, M.T.; Uribe, P .V . Deep Learning Based Synthesis of MRI, CT and PET: Review and Analysis.Medical Image Analysis2024,91, 103042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.media. 2023.103042

    2023

  13. [21]

    Multi-Agent Bayesian Optimization for Unknown Design Space Exploration

    Chen, X.; Bayrak, C.E.; Sha, Z. Multi-Agent Bayesian Optimization for Unknown Design Space Exploration. InVolume 3B: 49th Design Automation Conference (DAC), Washington, DC, USA, 10–14 September 2023; pp. 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1115/detc2023-115112

    2023 doi

  14. [22]

    CLIP-Mesh: Generating textured meshes from text using pretrained image-text models

    Khalid, N.; Xie, S.; Belilovsky, E.; Popa, T. CLIP-Mesh: Generating textured meshes from text using pretrained image-text models. In Proceedings of the SIGGRAPH Asia 2022 Conference Papers, Daegu, Republic of Korea, 6–9 December 2022; pp. 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1145/3550 469.3555392

    2022 doi

  15. [23]

    Text–to–3D Shape Generation.Computer Graphics Forum2024,43, 1–18

    Lee, J.; Savva, M.; Chang, A.X. Text–to–3D Shape Generation.Computer Graphics Forum2024,43, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/cgf.15061

    doi

  16. [24]

    An Accessible and Efficient Finite Element Implementation for Multiscale Surrogate Modeling of Hyperelastic Materials.Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 2026,259, 104542

    Yuan, J.; Yeoh, G.H.; Poh, L.H. An Accessible and Efficient Finite Element Implementation for Multiscale Surrogate Modeling of Hyperelastic Materials.Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 2026,259, 104542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.finel.2026.104542

    2026

  17. [25]

    Lattice Structures in Additive Manufacturing for Biomedical Applications: A Systematic Review.Polymers2025,17, 2285

    Polo, J.L.; García-Domínguez, A.; Rubio, Á. Lattice Structures in Additive Manufacturing for Biomedical Applications: A Systematic Review.Polymers2025,17, 2285. https://doi.org/10.339 0/polym17172285

  18. [26]

    Isotropic Design and Mechanical Characterization of TPMS-Based Hollow Cellular Lattices.Composite Structures2022,296, 115876

    Fu, H.; Sun, Y.; Du, W. Isotropic Design and Mechanical Characterization of TPMS-Based Hollow Cellular Lattices.Composite Structures2022,296, 115876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. compstruct.2021.114876. 2026,1, 0 16 of 17

    2021

  19. [27]

    Computational Investigation of the Fluidic Properties of Triply Periodic Minimal Surface Lattices.Designs2024,8, 69

    Shahid, A.; Shahid, M.; Rasheed, A. Computational Investigation of the Fluidic Properties of Triply Periodic Minimal Surface Lattices.Designs2024,8, 69. https://doi.org/10.3390/designs8 040069

    doi

  20. [28]

    Cementitious Composites Reinforced with 3D Printed Functionally Graded Polymer Lattices.Additive Manufacturing2021,47, 102327

    Xu, Y.; Zhang, L.; Gan, Z. Cementitious Composites Reinforced with 3D Printed Functionally Graded Polymer Lattices.Additive Manufacturing2021,47, 102327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. addma.2021.102327

    2021

  21. [29]

    Application of Functionally Graded Shell Lattice as Infill in Additive Manufacturing.Materials2023,16, 4401

    Kedziora, A.; Decker, M.; Museyibov, R. Application of Functionally Graded Shell Lattice as Infill in Additive Manufacturing.Materials2023,16, 4401. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16124401

    doi

  22. [30]

    Improvement of Mechanical Properties of Personalized Insole Manufac- tured with Selective Laser Sintering.3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing2023,10, 435–444

    Li, H.; Wei, D.; Zhao, H. Improvement of Mechanical Properties of Personalized Insole Manufac- tured with Selective Laser Sintering.3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing2023,10, 435–444. https://doi.org/10.1089/3dp.2022.0080

    2022

  23. [31]

    Enhancing Walking Stability of Foot Deformities Patients by 3D-Printed Ankle-Foot Orthosis

    Banga, A.; Belokar, R.; Kalra, P . Enhancing Walking Stability of Foot Deformities Patients by 3D-Printed Ankle-Foot Orthosis. InDesign Science and Innovation; Springer: Singapore,2021; pp. 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-9054-2_2

    2021 doi

  24. [32]

    Attention-Based Generative Adversarial Network in Medical Imaging: A Narrative Review.Computers in Biology and Medicine2022,151, 106283

    Zhao, X.; Hou, Y.; Pan, J. Attention-Based Generative Adversarial Network in Medical Imaging: A Narrative Review.Computers in Biology and Medicine2022,151, 106283. https://doi.org/10.1 016/j.compbiomed.2022.106283

    2022

  25. [33]

    Geometric Deep Learning on Anatomical Meshes for the Prediction of Alzheimer’s Disease

    Sarasua, J.A.; Lee, J.; Wachinger, C. Geometric Deep Learning on Anatomical Meshes for the Prediction of Alzheimer’s Disease. In Proceedings of the IEEE 18th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI), Nice, France, 13–16 April 2021; pp. 225–228. https://doi.org/10 ....

    2021

  26. [34]

    Inverse Design for Fluid-Structure Interactions Using Graph Network Simulators

    Allen, K.P .; Lopez-Guevara, A.; Stachenfeld, K. Inverse Design for Fluid-Structure Interactions Using Graph Network Simulators. InAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), New Orleans, LA, USA, 2022; pp. 1–14

    2022

  27. [35]

    Physics-Informed Deep Learning for Modeling of Cylindrical Shells.Archive of Mechanical Engineering2026,73, 1–18

    Kucherenko, V . Physics-Informed Deep Learning for Modeling of Cylindrical Shells.Archive of Mechanical Engineering2026,73, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.24425/ame.2026.1885

    2026

  28. [36]

    Machine Learning Analysis to Predict the Need for Ankle-Foot Orthosis in Patients with Stroke.Scientific Reports2021,11, 18533

    Choo, H.; Kim, J.; Kim, W. Machine Learning Analysis to Predict the Need for Ankle-Foot Orthosis in Patients with Stroke.Scientific Reports2021,11, 18533. https://doi.org/10.1038/s415 98-021-87826-3

    doi

  29. [37]

    Cranial Reconstruction Evaluation—Comparison of European Statistical Shape Model Performance.Bone Reports2022, 17, 101611

    Fuessinger, M.A.; Metzger, P .; Rothweiler, R.; Brandenburg, A. Cranial Reconstruction Evaluation—Comparison of European Statistical Shape Model Performance.Bone Reports2022, 17, 101611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bonr.2022.101611

    2022

  30. [38]

    The Finite Element Analysis on Diabetic Foot Biomechanics with Three Foot-Insole Combinations

    Bai, Y.; Li, J.; Ji, H. The Finite Element Analysis on Diabetic Foot Biomechanics with Three Foot-Insole Combinations. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Biomedical Engineering and Biotechnology (iCBEB), Singapore, 2023; pp. 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ icb...

    2023

  31. [39]

    DeepSDF: Learning Continuous Signed Distance Functions for Shape Representation

    Park, J.J.; Florence, P .; Straub, J.; Newcombe, R.; Lovegrove, S. DeepSDF: Learning Continuous Signed Distance Functions for Shape Representation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Confer- ence on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Long Beach, CA, USA, 15–20 June 20...

    2019

  32. [40]

    ANIR: Adaptive Neural Implicit Representation for 3D shape recon- struction and generation.Computer-Aided Design2025,179, 103938

    Liu, Y.; Zhang, J.; Guo, Y. ANIR: Adaptive Neural Implicit Representation for 3D shape recon- struction and generation.Computer-Aided Design2025,179, 103938. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. cad.2025.103938

    2025

  33. [41]

    Efficient Biomedical Entity Linking: Clinical Text Stan- dardization with Low-Resource Knowledge Bases

    Achara, A.; Sasidharan, N.; Nema, P . Efficient Biomedical Entity Linking: Clinical Text Stan- dardization with Low-Resource Knowledge Bases. In Proceedings of the 23rd Workshop on Biomedical Natural Language Processing, Bangkok, Thailand, 11 August 2024; pp. 542–551. https://...

    2024 doi

  34. [42]

    Large language model (LLM) assisted causal knowledge graph generation framework for engineering design.Journal of Engineering Design2026,35, 1–28

    Rawal, A.; Johnson, B.; Martinez, M. Large language model (LLM) assisted causal knowledge graph generation framework for engineering design.Journal of Engineering Design2026,35, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2026.2620966

    2026

  35. [43]

    A Survey of Emerging Applications of Large Language Models for Problems in Engineering.Advanced Engineering Informatics2025,65, 103066

    Mustapha, S. A Survey of Emerging Applications of Large Language Models for Problems in Engineering.Advanced Engineering Informatics2025,65, 103066. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei. 2024.103066

    2024

  36. [44]

    ChatDev: Communicative Agents for Software Development

    Qian, C.; Liu, W.; Chen, N. ChatDev: Communicative Agents for Software Development. In Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), Bangkok, Thailand, 12–17 August 2024; pp. 12277–12299. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1 /2024.acl-lo...

    2024 doi

  37. [45]

    Multi-Agent Deep Reinforcement Learning for Cooperative Computing Offloading.IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management2023,20, 3892–3905

    Suzuki, K.; Kobayashi, T.; Oki, E. Multi-Agent Deep Reinforcement Learning for Cooperative Computing Offloading.IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management2023,20, 3892–3905. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNSM.2023.3267809

    2023

  38. [46]

    Evaluating Large-Language-Model Chatbots to Engage Communities in Large-Scale Urban Planning.Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing2024,38, e15

    Dortheimer, M.; Martelaro, N.; Sprecher, S. Evaluating Large-Language-Model Chatbots to Engage Communities in Large-Scale Urban Planning.Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing2024,38, e15. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060424000027

    doi

  39. [47]

    Identifying Constitutive Parameters for Complex Hyperelastic Materials Using Physics-Informed Neural Networks.Soft Matter2024,20, 4521–4535

    Song, X.; Jin, Y. Identifying Constitutive Parameters for Complex Hyperelastic Materials Using Physics-Informed Neural Networks.Soft Matter2024,20, 4521–4535. https://doi.org/10.1039/ D4SM00001C

  40. [48]

    Graph Attention Networks

    Veliˇ ckovi´ c, P .; Cucurull, G.; Casanova, A.; Romero, A.; Liò, P .; Bengio, Y. Graph Attention Networks. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), New Orleans, LA, USA, 7 May 2018; pp. 1–12. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1710.10903

    2018 doi arXiv

  41. [49]

    Graph Neural Network-based Surrogate Models for Finite Element Analysis

    Shivaditya, R.; Alves, P .; Bugiotti, F. Graph Neural Network-based Surrogate Models for Finite Element Analysis. In Proceedings of the 21st International Symposium on Distributed Computing and Applications to Business, Engineering and Science (DCABES), Zhuzhou, China, 16–18 D...

    2022

  42. [50]

    Multiple-input Fourier Neural Operator (MIFNO) for source-dependent 3D elastodynamics.Journal of Computational Physics2025,529, 113813

    Lehmann, C.; Gatti, F.; Clouteau, D. Multiple-input Fourier Neural Operator (MIFNO) for source-dependent 3D elastodynamics.Journal of Computational Physics2025,529, 113813. https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2025.113813

    2025

  43. [51]

    Design and manufacturing process of 3D printed ankle-foot orthoses for podiatry

    Gupta, A.; Mittal, S.; Narayan, R.; Jhunjhunwala, A. Design and manufacturing process of 3D printed ankle-foot orthoses for podiatry. In3D Printing in Podiatric Medicine; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2023; pp. 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-323-91911-1.000 10-9

    2023 doi

  44. [52]

    Learning Mesh-Based Simulation with Graph Networks

    Pfaff, T.; Fortunato, M.; Sanchez-Gonzalez, A.; Battaglia, P .W. Learning Mesh-Based Simulation with Graph Networks. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representa- tions (ICLR), Virtual, 3–7 May 2021; pp. 1–18. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2010.03409

    2021 doi arXiv

  45. [53]

    Plantar Pressure Measurement Systems in Sports Biomechanics: A Review of Sensor Technologies.Sensor Review2026, ahead-of-print

    Wang, L.; Ni, J. Plantar Pressure Measurement Systems in Sports Biomechanics: A Review of Sensor Technologies.Sensor Review2026, ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/SR-05-2025- 0349

    2025 doi

  46. [54]

    Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition

    He, K.; Zhang, X.; Ren, S.; Sun, J. Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Las Vegas, NV , USA, 27–30 June 2016; pp. 770–778. https://doi.org/10.1109/cvpr.2016.90

    2016 doi

  47. [55]

    Occupancy Networks: Learning 3D Reconstruction in Function Space

    Mescheder, L.; Oechsle, M.; Niemeyer, M.; Nowozin, S.; Geiger, A. Occupancy Networks: Learning 3D Reconstruction in Function Space. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Long Beach, CA, USA, 15–20 June 2019; pp. 4460–4470....

    2019

  48. [56]

    PolyGen: An Autoregressive Generative Model of 3D Meshes

    Nash, C.; Ganin, Y.; Eslami, S.M.A.; Battaglia, P .W. PolyGen: An Autoregressive Generative Model of 3D Meshes. In Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), Virtual, 13–18 July 2020; pp. 7220–7229. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2002.10880

    2020 doi arXiv

  49. [57]

    Latent Multi-Scale Diffusion Model for Neural Implicit 3D Shape Generation

    Ji, G.; Yang, X.; Wu, Y. Latent Multi-Scale Diffusion Model for Neural Implicit 3D Shape Generation. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Vision and Image Processing (MVIP), Suzhou, China, 19–22 October 2023; pp. 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/ mvipit60427.2...

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.