Computing and Visualization in Science

, Volume 15, Issue 3, pp 111–121 | Cite as

Evaluation of per-pixel linked lists for distributed rendering and comparative analysis

  • Daniel KaukerEmail author
  • Michael Krone
  • Alexandros Panagiotidis
  • Guido Reina
  • Thomas Ertl
Special Issue: Remote Visualization


Rendering scenes with overlapping transparent faces is challenging for several reasons, including sorting geometry, managing multiple per-pixel fragments, and compositing. These questions have been solved for local rendering previously, for example by order-independent transparency approaches like Depth Peeling or A-buffer implementations. We discuss order-independent transparency algorithms in context of distributed rendering for large data sets or simulations which by design split the work load among a number of computation nodes. Furthermore, we evaluate a per-pixel linked list approach for distributed mesh rendering and multi-variant analysis of molecule data sets.


Distributed rendering Order-independent transparency  Multi-variant data analysis 

Mathematics Subject Classification

68U05 Computer graphics 68M14 Distributed systems 



This work is funded by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) as part of SFB 716 project D.3 and D.4, and by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research of Germany (BMBF) as part of the MCSimVis and FeToL project.


  1. 1.
    Bavoil, L., Callahan, S.P., Lefohn, A., Comba, J.L.D., Silva, C.T.: Multi-fragment effects on the GPU using the k-buffer. In: Symposium on Interactive 3D graphics and games, pp. 97–104 (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bavoil, L., Enderton, E.: Constant-memory order-independent transparency techniques. NVIDIA Corp. (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bavoil, L., Myers, K.: Order independent transparency with dual depth peeling. NVIDIA Corp. (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berman, H.M., Westbrook, J., Feng, Z., Gilliland, G., Bhat, T.N., Weissig, H., Shindyalov, I.N., Bourne, P.E.: The protein data bank. Nucl. Acids Res. 28, 235–242 (2000). Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blinn, J.F.: A generalization of algebraic surface drawing. ACM Trans. Graph. 1(3), 235–256 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brodlie, K., Brooke, J., Chen, M., Chisnall, D., Fewings, A.J., Hughes, C., John, N.W., Jones, M.W., Riding, M., Roard, N.: Visual supercomputing: technologies, applications and challenges. Comput. Graph. Forum 24(2), 217–245 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brodlie, K., Duce, D.A., Gallop, J.R., Walton, J.P.R.B., Wood, J.: Distributed and collaborative visualization. Comput. Graph. Forum 23(2), 223–251 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brown, P.: OpenGL Extension: \(\text{ NV }\_\text{ shader }\_\text{ buffer }\_\text{ store }\) (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brown, P., Dodd, C., Kilgard, M., Werness, E.: OpenGL Extension: \(\text{ NV }\_\text{ shader }\_\text{ buffer }\_\text{ load }\) (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Carpenter, L.: The A-buffer, an antialiased hidden surface method. In: Proceedings of the 11th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, SIGGRAPH ’84, vol. 18, pp. 103–108. ACM, New York (1984)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Edelsbrunner, H.: Deformable smooth surface design. Discret. Comput. Geom. 21(1), 87–115 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Eilemann, S., Makhinya, M., Pajarola, R.: Equalizer: a scalable parallel rendering framework. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 15(3), 436–452 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Everitt, C.: Interactive order-independent transparency. NVIDIA Corp. (2001)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fife, M., Strugar, F., Davies, L.: Whitepaper: adaptive volumetric shadow maps. Technical report, Intel (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Foley, J.D., Dam, A.V., Feiner, S.K., Hughes, J.F.: Computer Graphics: Principles and Practice, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co. Inc., Reading (1990)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gross, M., Pfister, H.: Point-Based Graphics. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Havran, V., Zajac, J., Drahokoupil, J., Seidel, H.P.: MPI informatics building model as data for your research. Research Report MPI-I-2009-4-004, MPI Informatik, Saarbruecken, Germany (2009)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Knowles, P., Leach, G., Zambetta, F.: Efficient layered fragment buffer techniques. In: Cozzi, P., Riccio, C. (eds.) OpenGL Insights, pp. 279–292. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2012)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Liu, F., Huang, M.C., Liu, X.H., Wu, E.H.: Efficient depth peeling via bucket sort. In: Proceedings of the Conference on High Performance Graphics, pp. 51–57. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Makhinya, M.: Performance challenges in distributed rendering systems. Ph.D. thesis, Institut für Informatik, Universität Zürich (2012)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Maule, M., Comba, J.A.L.D., Torchelsen, R.P., Bastos, R.: Technical section: a survey of raster-based transparency techniques. Comput. Graph. 35(6), 1023–1034 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Meligy, A.: Parallel and distributed visualization: the state of the art. In: Fifth International Conference on Computer Graphics, Imaging and Visualisation, CGIV ’08, pp. 329–336 (2008)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Moreland, K.: IceT Users’ Guide and Reference Version 2.1, vol. Tech Report SAND 2011–5011. Sandia National Laboratories (2011) Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Oberhumer, M.: Lzo documentation (2011).
  25. 25.
    O’Neil, M.A., Burtscher, M.: Floating-point data compression at 75 gb/s on a GPU. In: Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on General Purpose Processing on Graphics Processing Units, GPGPU-4, pp. 7:1–7:7. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Porter, T., Duff, T.: Compositing digital images. In: Proceedings of the 11th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, SIGGRAPH ’84, pp. 253–259. ACM, New York (1984)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Reina, G., Ertl, T.: Hardware-accelerated glyphs for mono- and dipoles in molecular dynamics visualization. In: EuroVis05: IEEE VGTC Symposium on Visualization, pp. 177–182 (2005)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Repplinger, M., Löffler, A., Rubinstein, D., Slusallek, P.: DRONE: a flexible framework for distributed rendering and display. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Visual Computing 2009 (ISVC09). Springer (2009)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Richards, F.M.: Areas, volumes, packing, and protein structure. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Bioeng. 6(1), 151–176 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Richardson, J.S.: The anatomy and taxonomy of protein structure. Adv. Protein Chem. 34, 167–339 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Salvi, M., Montgomery, J., Lefohn, A.: Adaptive transparency. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on High Performance Graphics, HPG ’11, pp. 119–126. ACM, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Vasilakis, A.A., Fudos, I.: Z-fighting aware depth peeling. In: ACM SIGGRAPH 2011 Posters, SIGGRAPH ’11, p. 77:1. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wittenbrink, C.M.: R-buffer: a pointerless A-buffer hardware architecture. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGGRAPH/EUROGRAPHICS Workshop on Graphics hardware, HWWS ’01, pp. 73–80. ACM (2001)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Yang, J.C., Hensley, J., Grün, H., Thibieroz, N.: Real-time concurrent linked list construction on the GPU. In: Proceedings of the 21st Eurographics Conference on Rendering, vol. 29, pp. 1297–1304 (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel Kauker
    • 1
    Email author
  • Michael Krone
    • 1
  • Alexandros Panagiotidis
    • 1
  • Guido Reina
    • 1
  • Thomas Ertl
    • 1
  1. 1.VISUS, University of StuttgartStuttgartGermany

Personalised recommendations