Hierarchical RLE level set
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article introduces the Hierarchical Run-Length Encoded (H-RLE) Level Set data structure. This novel data structure combines the best features of the DT-Grid (of Nielsen and Museth [2004]) and the RLE Sparse Level Set (of Houston et al. [2004]) to provide both optimal efficiency and extreme versatility. In brief, the H-RLE level set employs an RLE in a dimensionally recursive fashion. The RLE scheme allows the compact storage of sequential nonnarrowband regions while the dimensionally recursive encoding along each axis efficiently compacts nonnarrowband planes and volumes. Consequently, this new structure can store and process level sets with effective voxel resolutions exceeding 5000 × 3000 × 3000 (45 billion voxels) on commodity PCs with only 1 GB of memory. This article, besides introducing the H-RLE level set data structure and its efficient core algorithms, also describes numerous applications that have benefited from our use of this structure: our unified implicit object representation, efficient and robust mesh to level set conversion, rapid ray tracing, level set metamorphosis, collision detection, and fully sparse fluid simulation (including RLE vector and matrix representations.) Our comparisons of the popular octree level set and Peng level set structures to the H-RLE level set indicate that the latter is superior in both narrowband sequential access speed and overall memory usage.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.007 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".