MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401451046 · doi:10.1145/3675388

Fast orientable aperiodic ocean synthesis using tiling and blending

2024· article· en· W4401451046 on OpenAlexaff
Nicolas Lutz, Arnaud Schoentgen, Guillaume Gilet

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ACM on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUbisoft (Canada)Université de Sherbrooke
FundersUniversitas Brawijaya
KeywordsAperiodic graphFast Fourier transformComputer scienceComputationRendering (computer graphics)AlgorithmGridDisplacement (psychology)Computer graphics (images)GeologyMathematicsGeodesy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The simulation and rendering of the surface of a deep ocean are typically carried by computing a mesh displacement through an Inverse Fast Fourier Transform (IFFT) of an animated ocean spectrum. This process generates a spatially periodic ocean displacement that can be tiled to pave a large ocean surface. However, this creates tiling artifacts for large oceans. This effect can be toned down by mixing the displacement with noise, which disturbs the appearance of the ocean, or by overlapping the result of several IFFT at different scales, which increases computation times, all while not fully removing the periodic aspect. We propose to instead use tiling and blending, a procedural generation algorithm popular for real-time texture synthesis, in order to generate variations of the mesh displacement. This method also enables us to author the direction of the waves using a flow map. We show that this method is especially fast and can create a fully aperiodic ocean with minimal downsides.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.269 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ACM on Computer Graphics and Interactive TechniquesSame topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207