MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404527184 · doi:10.1145/3687943

Efficient Image-Space Shape Splatting for Monte Carlo Rendering

2024· article· en· W4404527184 on OpenAlexafffund
Xiaochun Tong, Toshiya Hachisuka

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer graphics (images)Rendering (computer graphics)Monte Carlo methodComputer visionSpace (punctuation)Image-based modeling and renderingArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A typical Monte Carlo rendering method contributes one light path only to a single pixel at a time. Reusing light paths across multiple pixels, however, can amortize the cost and improve the efficiency. The state of the art of path reuse is to employ shift mapping to reduce the cost of path reuse, while its computation cost is still proportional to the number of pixels processed in shift mapping. We propose a general framework for efficiently reusing light paths to multiple pixels arranged in arbitrary two-dimensional shapes. Our shape is defined as a set of multiple pixels, and the framework allows us to reuse light paths among pixels in a shape faster than simply evaluating all pixels via shift mapping. The key idea is to sparsely evaluate the contribution of shifted paths at random pixels within the shape and interpolate the contribution to the other pixels. We apply a debiasing estimator to ensure unbiasedness. Our method can be integrated with many existing rendering methods and brings consistent improvement over its single-pixel counterpart.

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)0.004
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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