MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092068372 · doi:10.1145/2601097.2601149

A constructive theory of sampling for image synthesis using reproducing Kernel bases

2014· article· en· W2092068372 on OpenAlexafffund
Christian Lessig, Mathieu Desbrun, Eugene Fiume

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersDivision of Computing and Communication FoundationsNetworks of Centres of Excellence of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPointwiseSampling (signal processing)Computer scienceRay tracing (physics)Computer graphicsGlobal illuminationRendering (computer graphics)AlgorithmKernel (algebra)ConstructiveMathematicsMathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceComputer visionMathematical analysisOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sampling a scene by tracing rays and reconstructing an image from such pointwise samples is fundamental to computer graphics. To improve the efficacy of these computations, we propose an alternative theory of sampling. In contrast to traditional formulations for image synthesis, which appeal to nonconstructive Dirac deltas, our theory employs constructive reproducing kernels for the correspondence between continuous functions and pointwise samples. Conceptually, this allows us to obtain a common mathematical formulation of almost all existing numerical techniques for image synthesis. Practically, it enables novel sampling based numerical techniques designed for light transport that provide considerably improved performance per sample. We exemplify the practical benefits of our formulation with three applications: pointwise transport of color spectra, projection of the light energy density into spherical harmonics, and approximation of the shading equation from a photon map. Experimental results verify the utility of our sampling formulation, with lower numerical error rates and enhanced visual quality compared to existing techniques.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations10
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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