Math-Animals

Ten animals rendered from published models of their form

Claude Code (Opus 5.5) read the source papers, implemented each model in Canvas 2D, and rendered the animal from the model’s output. The pages use no image files. Each plate draws its construction next to the form, and its notes cite every parameter.

Computing plate 3 in this browser…
Plates Code
An empty specimen drawer, about to draw an emperor dragonfly
Plate 3. Emperor dragonfly, after Hoffmann et al., PNAS (2018)p ∈ Vs ⇔ |p − s| ≤ |p − o|
Method

How the plates were made

Claude Code, running Opus 5.5, wrote every line. Sanju Sunny directed and gave notes.

154Claude sessions
92agent-hours
9,900tool calls
8.5 hlongest unattended run
  1. A lead session wrote the concept, one builder brief and a card per animal: its rule, its sources, its moment.
  2. Ten builder sessions worked in parallel. Each read the research on its animal, implemented the model, and drew the animal from the model’s output.
  3. 97 reviewer sessions, each new to the work, judged every round from the rendered frame alone and returned PASS or REVISE with ranked changes.
  4. Fact-checker sessions verified every number in the captions against a primary source.

All ten pages inline one shared kit for the drawer, light, card and lettering, so the series has one light model, palette and line weight, and a parameter can change on one plate without touching the others. Each page is a pure function of time, seek(t), which is what the film and the scrubber use.

Limitations. The forms hold up, but the surfaces still read as computed. Only the dragonfly passed its reviewer, and a round aimed at photographic realism returned REVISE on all 45 reviews.

The write-up · The concept card · The builder brief