<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>jimmySixDOF</author><text>For what it&amp;#x27;s worth this was an interesting HN post on use of volumetric Monte Carlo ML to design build a better basketball backboard :&lt;p&gt;Show HN: A basketball hoop to maximize shots that go in [video] - &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&amp;#x2F;item?id=22898653&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&amp;#x2F;item?id=22898653&lt;/a&gt;</text><parent_chain></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Monte Carlo Geometry Processing</title><url>http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~kmcrane/Projects/MonteCarloGeometryProcessing/index.html</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>peterwoerner</author><text>This problem seems to be getting a lot of research lately.  The problem being how to process PDEs on complex domains because meshing is a bitch.  There seem to be a number of good approaches, NURBS Fea, this, Lawerence Livermore and Caltech just come out with a polygonal mesher.&lt;p&gt;I wonder how tractable and accurate they are from the solver side.  Because generating high quality meshes really is a pain in the ass.</text><parent_chain></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Monte Carlo Geometry Processing</title><url>http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~kmcrane/Projects/MonteCarloGeometryProcessing/index.html</url></story>