MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2205345940 · doi:10.1145/1882261.1866180

Real-time collision culling of a million bodies on graphics processing units

2010· article· en· W2205345940 on OpenAlexaff
Fuchang Liu, Takahiro Harada, Young-Eun Lee, Young J. Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsAdvanced Micro Devices (Canada)
FundersNational Research Foundation of KoreaMinistry of Culture, Sports and TourismMinistry of Knowledge EconomyNvidia
KeywordsCUDAComputer scienceComputer graphics (images)Graphics processing unitGraphicsGeneral-purpose computing on graphics processing unitsCollision detectionComputer graphicsSubdivisionParallel computingCollisionComputational scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We cull collisions between very large numbers of moving bodies using graphics processing units (GPUs). To perform massively parallel sweep-and-prune (SaP), we mitigate the great density of intervals along the axis of sweep by using principal component analysis to choose the best sweep direction, together with spatial subdivisions to further reduce the number of false positive overlaps. Our algorithm implemented entirely on GPUs using the CUDA framework can handle a million moving objects at interactive rates. As application of our algorithm, we demonstrate the real-time simulation of very large numbers of particles and rigid-body dynamics.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

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 studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations31
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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