MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011793254 · doi:10.1145/2766992

Adaptive rendering with linear predictions

2015· article· en· W2011793254 on OpenAlexaff
Bochang Moon, José A. Iglesias-Guitián, Sung‐Eui Yoon, Kenny Mitchell

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRendering (computer graphics)PixelComputer scienceAlgorithmLinear modelGround truthArtificial intelligenceGlobal illuminationMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a new adaptive rendering algorithm that enhances the performance of Monte Carlo ray tracing by reducing the noise, i.e., variance, while preserving a variety of high-frequency edges in rendered images through a novel prediction based reconstruction. To achieve our goal, we iteratively build multiple, but sparse linear models. Each linear model has its prediction window, where the linear model predicts the unknown ground truth image that can be generated with an infinite number of samples. Our method recursively estimates prediction errors introduced by linear predictions performed with different prediction windows, and selects an optimal prediction window minimizing the error for each linear model. Since each linear model predicts multiple pixels within its optimal prediction interval, we can construct our linear models only at a sparse set of pixels in the image screen. Predicting multiple pixels with a single linear model poses technical challenges, related to deriving error analysis for regions rather than pixels, and has not been addressed in the field. We address these technical challenges, and our method with robust error analysis leads to a drastically reduced reconstruction time even with higher rendering quality, compared to state-of-the-art adaptive methods. We have demonstrated that our method outperforms previous methods numerically and visually with high performance ray tracing kernels such as OptiX and Embree.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations38
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207