How ‘bullet time’ will revolutionize exascale computing
February 12, 2013

( Credit: Warner Bros. Pictures)
The exascale computing era is almost upon us and computer scientists are already running into difficulties. 1 exaflop is 10^18 floating point operations per second, that’s a thousand petaflops. The current trajectory of computer science should produce this kind of capability by 2018 or so.
How do humans access and make sense of the exascale data sets?
The answer, of course, is to find some way to compress the output data without losing its essential features. Akira Kageyama and Tomoki Yamada from Kobe University in Japan put forward a creative solution: “bullet time”, the Hollywood filming technique made famous by movies like The Matrix, MIT Technology Review reports.
Bullet time is a special effect that slows down ordinary events while the camera angle changes as if it were flying around the action at normal speed. The technique involves plotting the trajectory of the camera in advance and then placing many high speed cameras along this route. All these cameras then film the action as it occurs.
This footage is later edited together to look as if the camera position has moved. And because the cameras are all high speed, the footage can be slowed down. The results are impressive, as anyone who has seen the Matrix movies or played the video games can attest.
Kageyama and Yamada say the same technique could revolutionize the way humans access exascale computer simulations. Their idea is to surround the simulated action with thousands, or even millions, of virtual cameras that all record the action as it occurs.
Humans can later “fly” through the action by switching from one camera angle to the next, just like bullet time.
Kageyama and Yamada say that the footage from a single camera can be compressed into a file of say 10 megabytes. So even if there are a million cameras recording the action, the total amount of data they produce is of the order of 10 terabytes. That’s tiny compared to the exascale size of the simulation.
Comments (10)
by Phillfrog
Unless I’m missing something, this article is meaningless. We have been “compressing” data down for human consumption since computers were invented. Computing is all about taking data and computing it to get a result that has meaning to the user. This information is intrinsically smaller than the data it was derived from.
What this article seems to be implying is that the more data a system processes, the more needs to be communicated to the user. If this were true, installing a new hard drive would mean more data would start coming out of your monitor into your head! Or the bigger the Internet gets the more results have to be squeezed onto the first page of your google search.
Weird article.
by Editor
It’s sampling in time and space (to reduce scientist analysis time — they can just analyze the samples, not the whole stream) rather than file compression, which would not retain the sample information. Like file compression, it also reduces file size. See the arXiv article.
by eldras
You can reduce the data by compression maths…equations that inflate on demand ‘per piece’ as components.
A good analogy is a pocket map.
You have the world folded into a pocket sized book, but it can open at any area you wish.
On google maps you can see this is even better.
The data size problem is ENTIRELY solvable by components and library functions like the early Von Neuman machines.
Well I know what I mean anyhow:)
(The rule is: you dont calculate anything until you need it)
by Snake Oil Baron
I missed something again. :-/
If the system is simulating something, why is there a need to simulate many camera angles? In a 3D video game simulations, the server doesn’t send what the environment looks like from every angle you may move to, does it? It sends you the info about the simulation (lots of which is a list of files on your oun computer) and your own computer figures out what it should show you based on how you move. I guess I am confused on where the calculation of the simulation–or data set or whatever–and the calculation of the point of view interface. Maybe I’ll just leave it to those who know about these things.
by funkervogt
A lot of compression could be applied.
by Walter Baltzley
I believe that in the future, all movies are going to be shot in 3D…using multiple camera angles and “point clouds”…. allowing the viewer to move the camera around…and possibly view different areas in the movie…creating a multi-dimensional story experience.
Movie Directors could have a blast…filming each character separately, allowing the viewer to see the same story from each person’s perspective. Parts of the story could be taking place “behind the scenes” giving viewers reason to watch movies over and over again to catch little nuances they may have missed before.
by WLGJR
IMO it would be great to apply what you mention in real life… we should find a way to create “super-multitasking” AIs or cyborgs (or special training methods to turn MOSHs into super-multitaskers) so that they can pay attention to and memorize the inputs from multiple cameras/earphones etc simultaneously.
This would greatly benefit surveillance/security, weather prediction and perhaps help with making STEM discoveries.
by DeBee Corley
This is nuts.
We are amassing hugh amounts of data, then writing software to mine the data. Of course, the miners are using preconceived notions to look for answers they expect.
Alas, the real data won’t be discovered until years later, by AI.
by tim the realist
Need to combine this with the holodeck project for immersive computing
by Gorden Russell
Right tim, they’re sure to do that, just as soon as they get the processing power.