MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1496245951 · doi:10.5555/2386103.2386122

Interactive parallel visualization of large particle datasets

2004· article· en· W1496245951 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Liang, Patricia Monger, H. M. P. Couchman

Bibliographic record

VenueEurographics Workshop on Parallel Graphics and Visualization · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceVisualizationRendering (computer graphics)Fluid simulationScientific visualizationComputer graphics (images)Interactive visualizationData visualizationVolume renderingFrame rateComputational scienceData miningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a new interactive parallel method for direct visualization of large particle datasets. Based on a parallel rendering cluster, a frame rate of 9 frames-per-second is achieved for 2563 particles using 7 render nodes and a display node. This provides real time interaction and interactive exploration of large datasets, which has been a challenge for scientific visualization and other real time data mining applications. The system allows scientists to study and to analyze the simulation results by viewing the particle cube from different perspectives, flying through the simulation field, or diving into the internal structure of the particles. A dynamic data distribution technique is designed for visualizing a highlighted subset of the particle volume. It maintains the load balance of the system and minimize the network traffic by updating the rendering pipeline through reconfiguration of the rendering chain. The method can be easily extended to other large datasets such as hydrodynamic turbulence, fluid dynamics, and so on.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.312 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEurographics Workshop on Parallel Graphics and VisualizationSame topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207