MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408900503 · doi:10.1145/3676641.3716279

Treelet Accelerated Ray Tracing on GPUs

2025· article· en· W4408900503 on OpenAlexaff
Yuan Hsi Chou, Tor M. Aamodt

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRay tracing (physics)Computer scienceTracingComputer graphics (images)Parallel computingOperating systemPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite advances in hardware acceleration, ray tracing use in real-time rendering is limited and often lowers frame rates, leading users such as video game players to disable the feature entirely. Prior work has shown that dividing the BVH tree into smaller subtrees (treelets) and traversing all rays that visit a treelet before switching treelets can significantly reduce memory traffic on a specialized accelerator, but there are many challenges to applying treelets to GPUs. We find that a naive treelet implementation is ineffective and propose optimizations to improve performance. Virtualized Treelet Queues consist of two main components. Ray virtualization increases the number of concurrent rays in flight to create more cache reuse opportunities by terminating raygen shaders that have already issued their trace ray instruction, reclaiming CUDA cores and allowing more raygen shaders to be executed. To take advantage of the increased concurrent rays, we propose a dynamic treelet queue architecture that dynamically switches between traversal modes to increase efficiency. We also find that performing warp repacking boosts SIMT efficiency of warps in the RT unit which is crucial to achieving good traversal performance with treelet queues. Our simulations show virtualized treelet queues achieve on average 95% speedup compared to a baseline GPU with ray tracing acceleration across all scenes in LumiBench rendered with path tracing at one sample per pixel with three max bounces per ray.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.318
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207