MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Estimation and Modeling of Actual Numerical Errors in Volume Rendering

2010· article· en· W2099057501 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Graphics Forum · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRendering (computer graphics)AlgorithmFidelityVolume renderingQuantization (signal processing)Data setTransfer functionFloating pointArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper we study the comprehensive effects on volume rendered images due to numerical errors caused by the use of finite precision for data representation and processing. To estimate actual error behavior we conduct a thorough study using a volume renderer implemented with arbitrary floating‐point precision. Based on the experimental data we then model the impact of floating‐point pipeline precision, sampling frequency and fixed‐point input data quantization on the fidelity of rendered images. We introduce three models, an average model, which does not adapt to different data nor varying transfer functions, as well as two adaptive models that take the intricacies of a new data set and transfer function into account by adapting themselves given a few different images rendered. We also test and validate our models based on new data that was not used during our model building.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.700

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.260 · 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