Abstract
Emerging methodologies for natural hazard risk assessments involve the execution of a multitude of different interacting simulation models that produce vast amounts of spatio-temporal datasets. This data pool is further enlarged when such simulation results are post-processed using GIS operations, for example to derive information for decision-making. The novel approach presented in this paper makes use of the GPU-accelerated rendering pipeline to perform such operations on-the-fly without storing any results on secondary memory and thus saving large amounts of storage space. Particularly, algorithms for three frequently used geospatial analysis methods are provided, namely for the computation of difference maps using map algebra and overlay operations, distance maps and buffers as examples for proximity analyses as well as kernel density estimation and inverse distance weighting as examples for statistical surfaces. In addition, a visualization tool is presented that integrates these methods using a node-based data flow architecture. The application of this visualization tool to the results of a real-world risk assessment methodology used in civil engineering shows that the memory footprint of post-processing datasets can be reduced at the order of terabytes. Although the technique has several limitations, most notably the reduced interoperability with conventional analysis tools, it can be beneficial for other use cases. When integrated into desktop GIS applications, for example, it can be used to quickly generate a preview of the results of complex analysis chains or it can reduce the amount of data to be transferred to web or mobile GIS applications.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
http://swai.ethz.ch/swaie/AnimatedInterpolation/AnimatedInterpolation.de.html (accessed April 18, 2017)
https://github.com/pyalot/webgl-heatmap (accessed April 18, 2017)
https://www.opengl.org/sdk/docs/man/html/smoothstep.xhtml (accessed April 26, 2017)
References
Adey BT et al. (2016) Ensuring acceptable levels of infrastructure related risks due to natural hazards with emphasis on conducting stress tests. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on Infrastructure Asset Management (SIAM), Kyoto, 2016
Akenine-Moller T, Haines E, Hoffman N (2008) Real-time rendering. A. K. Peters, Ltd., Wellesley
Baker JW, Miller MK, Markhvida M (2015). Local measures of disruption for quantifying seismic risk and reliability of complex networks. In: 12th International Conference on Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering, ICASP12, Vancouver, Canada, 2015. p 8
Christodoulou SE, Fragiadakis M (2015) Vulnerability assessment of water distribution networks considering performance data. J Infrastruct Syst 21:04014040. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)IS.1943-555X.0000224
Cova TJ (1999) GIS in emergency management. Geogr Inf Syst 2:845–858
de Dios OJ, Willumsen LG (2011) Modelling transport. Wiley, Chichester, UK
Grossi P, Kunreuther H, Windeler D (2005) An introduction to catastrophe models and insurance. In: Grossi P, Kunreuther H (eds) Catastrophe modeling: a new approach to managing risk. Springer, Boston, pp 23–42. doi:10.1007/0-387-23129-3_2
Hackl J, Adey BT, Heitzler M, Iosifescu-Enescu I (2015) An overarching risk assessment process to evaluate the risks associated with infrastructure networks due to natural hazards. Int J Performability Eng 11:153–168
Heitzler M, Hackl J, Adey BT, Iosifescu-Enescu I, Lam JC, Hurni L (2016) A method to visualize the evolution of multiple interacting spatial systems ISPRS. J Photogramm Remote Sens 117:217–226. doi:10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2016.03.002
Henneböhl K, Appel M, Pebesma E (2011) Spatial interpolation in massively parallel computing environments. Paper presented at the 14th AGILE International Conference on Geographic Information Science, Utrecht, The Netherlands
Herrmann FJ (2010) Randomized sampling and sparsity: getting more information from fewer samples. Geophysics 75:WB173–WB187. doi:10.1190/1.3506147
Huang H, Li Y, Gartner G, Wang Y (2011) An SVG-based method to support spatial analysis in XML/GML/SVG-based WebGIS. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 25:1561–1574. doi:10.1080/13658816.2010.532133
Iverson J, Kamath C, Karypis G (2012) Fast and effective lossy compression algorithms for scientific datasets. Paper presented at the 18th international conference on Parallel Processing, Rhodes Island, Greece
Kellens W, Deckers P, Saleh H, Vanneuville W, De Maeyer P, Allaert G, De Sutter R (2008) A GIS tool for flood risk analysis in Flanders (Belgium). In: Brebbia C, Beriatos E (eds) Risk analysis VI: computer simulation and hazard mitigation, 2008. WIT Press, pp 21–27
Kirsch F, Döllner J (2004) Rendering techniques for hardware-accelerated image-based CSG. Journal of WSCG 12:221–228
Krisp JM, Peters S, Murphy CE, Fan H (2009) Visual bandwidth selection for kernel density maps. Photogrammetrie - Fernerkundung - Geoinformation 2009:445–454. doi:10.1127/1432-8364/2009/0032
Krisp JM, Špatenková O (2010) Kernel density estimations for visual analysis of emergency response data. In: Konecny M, Zlatanova S, Bandrova LT (eds) Geographic information and cartography for risk and crisis management: towards better solutions. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 395–408. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-03442-8_27
Kull D, Feldman A (1998) Evolution of Clark’s unit graph method to spatially distributed runoff. J Hydrol Eng 3:9–19. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0699(1998)3:1(9)
Kunz M, Grêt-Regamey A, Hurni L (2011) Visualization of uncertainty in natural hazards assessments using an interactive cartographic information system. Nat Hazards 59:1735–1751. doi:10.1007/s11069-011-9864-y
Leskens JG, Kehl C, Tutenel T, Kol T, Haan G, Stelling G, Eisemann E (2015) An interactive simulation and visualization tool for flood analysis usable for practitioners. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang:1–18. doi:10.1007/s11027-015-9651-2
Lienert C, Bär HR, Hurni L (2013) GPU-accelerated spatial interpolation rendering for web-based environmental monitoring In: 26th International Cartographic Conference: From Pole to Pole Dresden, Germany, 2013
Lohr SL (2009) Sampling: design and analysis. Cengage Learning, Boston
Losey S, Wehrli A (2013) Schutzwald in der Schweiz: Vom Projekt SilvaProtect-CH zum harmonisierten Schutzwald. Final Report. Bundesamt für Umwelt (BAFU), Bern
Mei G (2014) Evaluating the power of GPU acceleration for IDW interpolation algorithm. Sci World J 2014:8. doi:10.1155/2014/171574
Mendlik T, Gobiet A (2016) Selecting climate simulations for impact studies based on multivariate patterns of climate change. Clim Chang 135:381–393. doi:10.1007/s10584-015-1582-0
Pant R, Hall JW, Barr S, Alderson D (2014) Spatial risk analysis of interdependent infrastructures subjected to extreme hazards. In: Vulnerability, uncertainty, and risk. pp 677–686. doi:10.1061/9780784413609.069
Ribicic H, Waser J, Fuchs R, Blöschl G, Gröller E (2013) Visual analysis and steering of flooding simulations. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph 19:1062–1075. doi:10.1109/TVCG.2012.175
Rickenmann D (1999) Empirical relationships for debris flows. Nat Hazards 19:47–77. doi:10.1023/A:1008064220727
Rogerson P (2015) Statistical methods for geography: a student’s guide. SAGE Publications, London
Silverman BW (1998) Density estimation for statistics and data analysis. Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton
Storer JA (1988) Data compression: methods and theory. Computer Science Press, Inc
Szymkiewicz R (2010) Numerical modeling in open channel hydraulics. Water science & engineering papers, vol 83. Springer, Dordrecht
Thakali L, Kwon TJ, Fu L (2015) Identification of crash hotspots using kernel density estimation and kriging methods: a comparison. J Mod Transp 23:93–106. doi:10.1007/s40534-015-0068-0
Trapp M, Semmo A, Döllner J (2015) Interactive rendering and stylization of transportation networks using distance fields
Vaaraniemi M, Treib M, Westermann R (2011) High-quality cartographic roads on high-resolution DEMs. J WSCG 19:41–48
van der Zwaag J, Zhang S, Moorhead R, Welch D, Dyer J (2015) Visualizing uncertainty of river model ensembles. Paper presented at the IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging Conference on Visualization and Data Analysis, San Francisco, California, United States
Voumard J, Caspar O, Derron MH, Jaboyedoff M (2013) Dynamic risk simulation to assess natural hazards risk along roads. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 13:2763–2777. doi:10.5194/nhess-13-2763-2013
Waser J, Fuchs R, Ribicic H, Schindler B, Bloschl G, Groller E (2010) World lines. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph 16:1458–1467. doi:10.1109/tvcg.2010.223
Welch TA (1984) A technique for high-performance data compression. Computer 17:8–19. doi:10.1109/mc.1984.1659158
Wolff M, Asche H (2009) Geovisualization approaches for spatio-temporal crime scene analysis—towards 4D crime mapping. In: Geradts ZJMH, Franke KY, Veenman CJ (eds) Computational forensics: Third International Workshop, IWCF 2009, The Hague, The Netherlands, august 13–14, 2009. Proceedings. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 78–89. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-03521-0_8
Wüest M, Frei C, Altenhoff A, Hagen M, Litschi M, Schär C (2010) A gridded hourly precipitation dataset for Switzerland using rain-gauge analysis and radar-based disaggregation. Int J Climatol 30:1764–1775
Xia J, Dong P, Tang J (2016a) Efficient rendering of natural hazards data in mobile GIS. GEOMAT NAT HAZ RISK 7:1726–1730. doi:10.1080/19475705.2015.1084954
Xia W et al (2016b) A comprehensive study of the past, present, and future of data deduplication. Proc IEEE 104:1681–1710. doi:10.1109/JPROC.2016.2571298
Zhang J, You S (2012) CudaGIS: report on the design and realization of a massive data parallel GIS on GPUs. Paper presented at the Third ACM SIGSPATIAL International Workshop on GeoStreaming, Redondo Beach, California
Zhang J, You S, Gruenwald L (2015) Large-scale spatial data processing on GPUs and GPU-accelerated clusters. SIGSPATIAL Spec 6:27–34. doi:10.1145/2766196.2766201
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
To the best knowledge of the corresponding author, the submitted manuscript complies with the ethical standards of the journal.
Conflict of Interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Funding
This work was supported by the European Union’s Seventh Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under Grant 603960.
Ethical Approval
No human or animal tests were conducted.
Informed Consent
As there were no user studies conducted in this research, no informed consent had to be obtained.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Heitzler, M., Lam, J.C., Hackl, J. et al. GPU-Accelerated Rendering Methods to Visually Analyze Large-Scale Disaster Simulation Data. J geovis spat anal 1, 3 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41651-017-0004-4
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41651-017-0004-4