MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147842609 · doi:10.1109/tvcg.2006.72

HDR VolVis: high dynamic range volume visualization

2006· article· en· W2147842609 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Xiaoru Yuan, Minh X. Nguyen, B. Chen, David H. Porter

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersResearch Institute for Applied Mechanics, Kyushu UniversityPeking UniversityRyerson UniversityUniversity of Minnesota
KeywordsComputer scienceTone mappingVolume renderingHigh dynamic rangeRendering (computer graphics)VisualizationComputer graphics (images)PixelCompositingParallel renderingData visualizationImage resolutionArtificial intelligenceComputer visionDynamic rangeImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present an interactive high dynamic range volume visualization framework (HDR VolVis) for visualizing volumetric data with both high spatial and intensity resolutions. Volumes with high dynamic range values require high precision computing during the rendering process to preserve data precision. Furthermore, it is desirable to render high resolution volumes with low opacity values to reveal detailed internal structures, which also requires high precision compositing. High precision rendering will result in a high precision intermediate image (also known as high dynamic range image). Simply rounding up pixel values to regular display scales will result in loss of computed details. Our method performs high precision compositing followed by dynamic tone mapping to preserve details on regular display devices. Rendering high precision volume data requires corresponding resolution in the transfer function. To assist the users in designing a high resolution transfer function on a limited resolution display device, we propose a novel transfer function specification interface with nonlinear magnification of the density range and logarithmic scaling of the color/ opacity range. By leveraging modern commodity graphics hardware, multiresolution rendering techniques and out-of-core acceleration, our system can effectively produce an interactive visualization of large volume data, such as 2,048(3).

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)0.002
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations35
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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