Construct · 2 fields · 4 citations

Where does skeleton collide?

One name. Different field. Different construct. One map.

● jingle · one word, two constructs Nearest construct by meaningconcurrencycompare the meanings
How to read this

Every construct on the map is compared with every other by the meaning of its definitions, and the closest one is surfaced here. The nearest construct to skeleton is concurrency.

Hold this as a prompt, not a verdict. Two constructs sitting close in meaning is a reason to read them side by side and decide for yourself whether they are one idea under two names. It is not proof that they are. Compare the meanings in the Collider.

skeleton2 CONSTRUCTSShape skeletonBLUM · MEDIAL AXISAlgorithmic skeletonCOLE · PARALLEL PATTERN

Spokes are fields; dashed arcs are shared lineage. Tap a field for its definition, unit, and measures.

1967Shape skeleton1989Algorithmic skeleton
2026

Drag to watch the word get claimed. Each field appears at the publication date of the earliest source cited for it. Tap a year to see which.

Image processing and computational geometry

the thin central curve of interior points that have more than one nearest point on a shape's boundary.

Harry Blum's 1967 A transformation for extracting new descriptors of shape introduced the skeleton, or medial axis, of a two-dimensional shape: the set of interior points that have more than one nearest point on the boundary, forming a thin central curve that summarises the shape's form. Siddiqi and Pizer's 2008 edited volume Medial representations collected the mathematics and algorithms that grew from it. The referent is a computed geometric locus inside an outline, defined by distance to a boundary, not a framework of bones in a body or a template for organising a parallel program.[1][2]

Unit
One thin central locus per outline, defined by equal distance to the boundary
Recovery means
Not applicable
Measured by
Computed from a binary shape by distance transforms, thinning algorithms, or Voronoi methods

Parallel and distributed computing

a reusable higher-order pattern, such as a pipeline or farm, that structures parallel computation and hides its coordination.

Murray Cole's 1989 book Algorithmic skeletons: Structured management of parallel computation named the algorithmic skeleton: a reusable higher-order pattern, such as a pipeline, farm, or map, that captures a common structure of parallel computation and hides its coordination from the programmer. González-Vélez and Leyton's 2010 survey catalogued the frameworks built on the idea. The referent is a programming abstraction for structuring concurrent work, filled in with application code, and it has nothing to do with a body's bones or the central line of a drawn shape.[3][4]

Unit
One structured pattern of parallel execution, parameterised by user code
Recovery means
Not applicable
Measured by
Evaluated by speedup, scalability, and programming effort across many processors

Next

Run it through the Collider, or take the citations with you.

See how skeleton sits against neighbouring constructs in the Collider, or export every reference on this page in one click.

Open in ColliderExport BibTeXReport this collision

Nearby collisions

abstraction4 fields · 4 citationsjingle · one word, four constructsframe3 fields · 3 citationsjingle · one word, three constructsmorphology4 fields · 7 citationsjingle · one word, four constructs

References

  1. Blum, H. (1967). A transformation for extracting new descriptors of shape. In W. Wathen-Dunn (Ed.), Models for the perception of speech and visual form (pp. 362–380). MIT Press.
  2. Siddiqi, K., & Pizer, S. M. (Eds.). (2008). Medial representations: Mathematics, algorithms and applications. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8658-8
  3. Cole, M. (1989). Algorithmic skeletons: Structured management of parallel computation. Pitman/MIT Press.
  4. González-Vélez, H., & Leyton, M. (2010). A survey of algorithmic skeleton frameworks: High-level structured parallel programming enablers. Software: Practice and Experience, 40(12), 1135–1160. https://doi.org/10.1002/spe.1026

Cited on this page?

Confirm your construct, or correct us.

If your work is cited behind one of these entries, you know better than we do whether we captured the meaning right. Confirm it, suggest an edit, or dispute it, and your name goes on the entry as an author who has checked it, linked to your ORCID.

Claim your construct