Stream processors texture generation model for 3d virtual worlds learning tools in vacademia
-
Upload
mikhail-fominykh -
Category
Technology
-
view
652 -
download
1
description
Transcript of Stream processors texture generation model for 3d virtual worlds learning tools in vacademia
1
Stream Processors Texture Generation Model for 3D Virtual Worlds
Learning Tools in vAcademia
9th International Symposium on Multimedia (ISM) December 9–11, 2013
Anaheim, CA, USA
Andrey Smorkalov and Mikhail Morozov
Volga State University of Technology, Russia
Mikhail Fominykh
Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway
VSUT
2
Outline
o Motivation and Challenges o Related Work o Texture Generation Model o Original Methods o Performance Evaluation o User Evaluation o Conclusions
VSUT
3
Motivation and challenges: Applying 3D VWs for learning
o 3D Virtual Worlds (VWs) – Have great features… … but not widely used
o Challenges – Steep learning curve – Demand for computational and network resources – lack of features that educators use in everyday teaching
o Solution Proposal – Enabling learning scenarios which require large amounts
of 2D graphical content displayed VSUT
4
Related work: Large Amount of Graphics in 3D VWs
VSUT
o Multiple workspaces or virtual screens … but their performance is limited o Small number of active screens (Second
Life has a limit of five) o Static images (Sametime 3D has a sticky
notes tool, but notes are static, placed on slots, constant size, and no other tools on the same screen
o Individual use of screens
5 VSUT
Web conferencing?
6 VSUT
7
Related work: Current technological limitations
Usually, an image is calculated on a CPU on client side (e.g., in Second Life™ and Blue Mars™) or server side (e.g., in Open Wonderland™) and then loaded into the stream-processor memory as a texture. Therefore, the use of dynamic 2D images in existing 3D VWs is very limited.
VSUT
8 VSUT
Interactive virtual whiteboard (VWB) of vAcademia
9 VSUT
10 VSUT
Accessing tools
11
Texture Generation Model: Motivation
o CPU ‒ CPU is loaded maintaining 3D environment ‒ source data for the synthesis of images and the data area for the
resultant images are in the local memory of other devices
o Stream processors ‒ 3D visualization is hardware-based and conducted on SPs ‒ SPs’ computing power usually exceeds the capabilities of CPUs
tenfold
o Challenge ‒ SPs have hardware limitations which do not allow to use them for
implementing most of the classical image processing algorithms
VSUT
12
Texture Generation Model: Mathematical Model (formalization)
VSUT
o Defining – Image, Transformation, Figure, Rasterization, Projected figure
o And configurable functionality o texture sampling, color mask, hardware cut of the rasterization
area, hardware-based blending of the source image and the rasterized image
o Calculating parts of image (even single pixels instead of the whole image)
o Comparing the efficiency of different approaches to any specific task
13
Texture Generation Model: Programming Model
The programming model and architecture are based on four main objects o Texture – image stored in SP memory o Drawing Target defines resultant image o Filter – subroutine returns color in coords. o Filter Sequence – sequence of Filters and limiting condition <β>
VSUT
14
Texture Generation Model: Programming Model
o Modification of the DWT Algorithm for SPs ‒ Original modification of the Discrete Wavelet
Transformation (DWT) algorithm to run on SPs ‒ We applied the method of 2D DWT filter cascade
o Rasterising Attributed Vector Primitives on SPs ‒ SPs are able to deal only with vertexes and triangles ‒ We use a specific optimized method for triangulating
figures
VSUT
15
Original methods for processing large amounts of graphics in 3D VWs
o Sharing Changing Blocks ‒ Sharing application window – Sharing video ‒ Sharing web-camera image – Sharing screen area
o Sharing Attributed Vector Figures ‒ Drawing figures and typing text – Inserting text
o Processing Static Images ‒ Slideshow – Area print screen ‒ Image insert – Backchannel ‒ Sticky notes
VSUT
16
Original methods for processing large amounts of graphics in 3D VWs
o Sharing Changing Blocks ‒ Sharing application window – Sharing video ‒ Sharing web-camera image – Sharing screen area
o Sharing Attributed Vector Figures ‒ Drawing figures and typing text – Inserting text
o Processing Static Images ‒ Slideshow – Area print screen ‒ Image insert – Backchannel ‒ Sticky notes
VSUT
17
Sharing application window
18
Drawing figures and typing text
19
Sticky notes
20
Performance Evaluation
I. Comparison of the algorithm performance on SPs and CPU
II. General efficiency of the system
We present average results acquired by running the system on ‒ 20 different hardware configurations with Intel CPU and
NVidia / ATI graphics adapters from the same price range ‒ On each hardware configuration 10 runs were conducted for
each image size.
VSUT
21
Performance Evaluation: I. Algorithms on SPs and CPU
The rationale behind using SPs (instead of CPU) for image processing in vAcademia is confirmed. The improvement differs from the ratio of the peaking performance of SPs to the peaking performance of CPU not more than twofold, which can be considered satisfactory.
VSUT
22
Performance Evaluation: II. General Efficiency of the System
Tested: performance degradation as a function of the number of: o VWBs (in one location) o actively used VWBs o simultaneous changes of images on
VWBs
VSUT
23
Testing performance with 50 VWBs
VSUT
24
Performance degradation as a function of the number of VWBs
VSUT
92%
93%
94%
95%
96%
97%
98%
99%
100%
0 10 20 30 40 50
Performance
Number of whiteboards
AveragePeaking
25
Performance degradation as a function of the number of actively used VWBs
VSUT
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
0 5 10 15 20 25
Performance
Number of actively used whiteboards
AveragePeaking
26
Performance degradation as a function of the number of simultaneous changes of images on VWBs
VSUT
80%
84%
88%
92%
96%
100%
1 2 3 4 5
Performance
Number of simultaneous changes of images
AveragePeaking
27
User Evaluation
o Diagram designing task using provided templates
o 23 second-year CS students o No tutorials on vAcademia were
given o All participants had experience
playing 3D video games o Data: system logs, questionnaires,
and an interview VSUT
28
Implications
VSUT
29
User Evaluation
VSUT
Question Str. agree Agree N D SD It was clear what functions the VWB has and how to access them.
16 7
It was comfortable "to look" at VWBs (to change the view angle).
15 8
VWBs displayed the contents crisply and precisely enough to understand them.
14 9
VWBs displayed the contents quickly enough, and delays did not influence the process.
14 8
Increasing the # of VWBs in the virtual auditorium during the class did not lead to visible delays.
13 10
VWB is a convenient (handy) enough tool for working on similar tasks.
13 8 2
Working with vAcademia tools is more comfortable than with traditional tools, for similar tasks.
15 8
It was clear how to work in vAcademia. 19 4
30
Conclusions
o Original method for collaborative work with large amount of graphical content in 3D virtual worlds
o Design & implementation in vAcademia o The algorithms we applied
– are superior to the commonly used ones
o The tools we designed – have stable work and – have educational value
VSUT
31
Future Work
o Designing scenarios for new learning activities possible using our method
o Conducting a full-scale user evaluation testing all designed tools
o Developing new tools based on our method
VSUT
32
Thank you!
Andrey Smorkalov [email protected]
Mikhail Fominykh [email protected]
Mikhail Morozov [email protected]
http://vacademia.com
http://www.facebook.com/vAcademia
@vacademia_info
http://slideshare.net/vacademia
http://slideshare.net/mfominykh
VSUT