MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117932496 · doi:10.1109/tvcg.2010.116

Sort-First Parallel Volume Rendering

2010· article· en· W2117932496 on OpenAlexafffund
Brendan Moloney, Marco Ament, Daniel Weiskopf, Torsten Möller

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersSimon Fraser UniversityDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftU.S. National Library of MedicineNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Arizona
KeywordsComputer scienceRendering (computer graphics)sortVolume renderingParallel renderingAlternate frame renderingScalabilitySlicingTiled renderingParallel computingComputationComputer graphics (images)Texture memorySoftware renderingAlgorithmComputer graphics3D computer graphicsDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sort-first distributions have been studied and used far less than sort-last distributions for parallel volume rendering, especially when the data are too large to be replicated fully. We demonstrate that sort-first distributions are not only a viable method of performing data-scalable parallel volume rendering, but more importantly they allow for a range of rendering algorithms and techniques that are not efficient with sort-last distributions. Several of these algorithms are discussed and two of them are implemented in a parallel environment: a new improved variant of early ray termination to speed up rendering when volumetric occlusion occurs and a volumetric shadowing technique that produces more realistic and informative images based on half angle slicing. Improved methods of distributing the computation of the load balancing and loading portions of a subdivided data set are also presented. Our detailed test results for a typical GPU cluster with distributed memory show that our sort-first rendering algorithm outperforms sort-last rendering in many scenarios.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.003

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.253 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations29
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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