Advertisement

GeoInformatica

, Volume 17, Issue 1, pp 207–233 | Cite as

HFPaC: GPU friendly height field parallel compression

  • Đorđe M. ĐurđevićEmail author
  • Igor I. Tartalja
Article

Abstract

In this paper, we present a novel method for fast lossy or lossless compression and decompression of regular height fields. The method is suitable for SIMD parallel implementation and thus inherently suitable for modern GPU architectures. Lossy compression is achieved by approximating the height field with a set of quadratic Bezier surfaces. In addition, lossless compression is achieved by superimposing the residuals over the lossy approximation. We validated the method’s efficiency through a CUDA implementation of compression and decompression algorithms. The method allows independent decompression of individual data points, as well as progressive decompression. Even in the case of lossy decompression, the decompressed surface is inherently seamless. In comparison with the GPU-oriented state-of-the-art method, the proposed method, combined with a widely available lossless compression method (such as DEFLATE), achieves comparable compression ratios. The method’s efficiency slightly outperforms the state-of-the-art method for very high workloads and considerably for lower workloads.

Keywords

Height field Lossy and lossless compression Progressive decompression Bezier surface SIMD parallelism 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank NVIDIA Corporation for providing graphics adapters on which the performance measurements were carried out. We would also like to thank Pat Sanders and Hypack, Inc. for providing support for the research. Special thanks to Peter Lindstrom for help in interpreting the results of his work. This work was partially supported by the projects TR32039 and TR32047 of the Ministry of Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia.

References

  1. 1.
    Asirvatham A, Hoppe H (2005) Terrain rendering using GPU-based geometry clipmaps. In: Pharr M (ed) GPU gems 2, Addison Wesley, pp 27–45Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dick C, Schneider J, Westermann R (2009) Efficient geometry compression for GPU-based decoding in realtime terrain rendering. Comput Graph Forum 28(1):67–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gobbetti E, Marton F, Cignoni P, Benedetto MD, Ganovelli F (2006) C-BDAM - compressed batched dynamic adaptive meshes for terrain rendering. Comput Graph Forum 25(3):333–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Inanc M. (2008) Compressing terrain elevation datasets. PhD dissertation, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Troy, NY, USAGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kidner DB, Smith DH (1992) Compression of digital elevation models by Huffman coding. Comput Geosci 18(8):1013–1034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kidner DB, Smith DH (2003) Advances in the data compression of digital elevation models. Comput Geosci 29(8):985–1002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lewis M, Smith DH (1994) Optimal predictors for compression of digital elevation models. Comput Geosci 20(7–8):1137–1141Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lindstrom P, Cohen JD (2010) On-the-fly decompression and rendering of multiresolution terrain. Proc. of the 2010 ACM SIGGRAPH symp. on Interactive 3D Graphics and Games, Washington, D.C., USA, February 19–21, pp 65–73Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Flynn M (1972) Some computer organizations and their effectiveness. IEEE Trans Comput C-21(9):948–960CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    http://www.pkware.com (accessed: 27 Sept 2011)
  11. 11.
    U.S. Geological Survey National Geospatial Program Lidar Guidelines and Base Specification, http://lidar.cr.usgs.gov/USGS-NGP Lidar Guidelines and Base Specification v13(ILMF).pdf (accessed: 12 Oct 2011)
  12. 12.
    Earth explorer: http://edcsns17.cr.usgs.gov/NewEarthExplorer/ (accessed: 27 Sept 2011)
  13. 13.
    http://gis.utah.gov/ (accessed: 27 Sept 2011)
  14. 14.
    Gerstner T (2003) Multiresolution visualization and compression of global topographic data. GeoInformatica 7(1):7–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kim JK, Ra JB (2004) A real-time terrain visualization algorithm using wavelet-based compression. Vis Comput 20(2):67–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bettio F, Gobbetti E, Marton F, Pintore G (2007) High-quality networked terrain rendering from compressed bitstreams. Proc. of the 12-th int. conf. on 3D web technology, Perugia, Italy, April 15–18, pp 37–44Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Xie Z, Andrade MA, Franklin WR, Cutler B, Inanc M, Muckell J, Tracy DM (2008) Progressive transmission of lossily compressed terrain. Conf. Latinoamericana de Informática (CLEI 2008), Santa Fe, Argentina, September 8–12, http://www.ecse.rpi.edu/Homepages/wrf/p/127-andrade-prog-trans-2008.pdf (accessed: 12 Oct 2011)
  18. 18.
    Stookey J, Xie Z, Cutler B, Franklin WR, Tracy DM, Andrade MA (2008) Parallel ODETLAP for terrain compression and reconstruction. Proc. of the 16th ACM SIGSPATIAL int. conf. on Advances in geographic information systems, Irvine, California, USA, November 5–7, doi: 10.1145/1463434.1463456
  19. 19.
    Li Y (2011) CUDA-accelerated HD-ODETLAP: a high dimensional geospatial data compression framework. PhD dissertation, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Troy, NY, USAGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Franklin WR (1995) Compressing elevation data. SSD’95 Proc. of the 4th Int. Symp. on Advances in Spatial Databases, Portland, Maine, USA, Aug 6–9, pp 385–404Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chen ZT, Tobler WR (1986) Quadtree representations of digital terrain. Proc. Auto-Carto London, London, England, Sept 14–19, pp 475–484Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kidner DB, Smith DH (1997) Storage-efficient techniques for representing digital terrain models. Innovations in GIS 4, Taylor & Francis, pp 25–41Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kidner DB, Dorey M, Smith DH (1999) What’s the point? interpolation and extrapolation with a regular grid DEM. Proc. of GeoComputation’99, Virginia, USA, July 25–28, http://www.geovista.psu.edu/sites/geocomp99/Gc99/082/gc_082.htm (accessed 08 Nov 2011)
  24. 24.
    Wren EA (1973) Trend surface analysis-a review. Can J Explor Geophys 9(1):39–44Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhang J, You S, Gruenwald L (2011) Parallel quadtree coding of large-scale raster geospatial data on GPGPUs. Proc. of the 19th ACM SIGSPATIAL int. conf. on Advances in geographic information systems, Chicago, Illinois, USA, November 1–4, doi: 10.1145/2093973.2094047
  26. 26.
    Moffat A, Ahn VN (2005) Binary codes for non-uniform sources. Data Compression Conf., Snowbird, Utah, USA, March 29–31, pp 133–142Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Đurđević Đ, Tartalja I (2011) Domino tiling: a new method of real-time conforming mesh construction for rendering changeable height fields. J Comput Sci Technol 26(6):971–987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gerald F (2002) Curves and surfaces for CAGD: a practical guide. The Morgan Kaufmann Series in Computer Graphics and Geometric Modeling, 5th edGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Harris M, Sengupta S, Owens JD (2007) Parallel prefix sum (scan) with CUDA. In: Nguyen H (ed) GPU gems 3, Addison Wesley, pp 851–876Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    NVIDIA Corp (2010) NVIDIA CUDA C programming guide. http://developer.nvidia.com/cuda-toolkit (accessed 10 Apr 2012)

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Belgrade - School of Electrical EngineeringBelgradeSerbia

Personalised recommendations