NeuroSurgSim/Backlog: Difference between revisions
(Created page with "__NOTITLE__ __NOTOC__ {| border="1" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" | style="background:#efefef;" align="left" valign="top" width="150px" | '''Home|''' *[[Ne...") |
No edit summary |
||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| style="background:#efefef;" align="left" valign="top" width="150px" | | | style="background:#efefef;" align="left" valign="top" width="150px" | | ||
'''[[NeuroSurgSim|Home | '''[[NeuroSurgSim|Home]]''' | ||
*[[NeuroSurgSim/Management|Project Management]] | *[[NeuroSurgSim/Management|Project Management]] | ||
*[[NeuroSurgSim/TCon-Meetings|TCons/Meetings]] | *[[NeuroSurgSim/TCon-Meetings|TCons/Meetings]] |
Revision as of 20:18, 18 March 2014
__NOTITLE__
|
Mesh Generator
Hybrid Finite Element Solver
Collision detection and response
Performance Issues and Benchmarking1. What kind of performance do we expect from FEM, collision detection as well as collision response? What is the mesh complexity? How much accuracy do we want? What is the performance goal? For example, for haptic rendering, the collision detection time budget is much lower than that for physics simulation. 2. I realize that it is already a major challenge to integrate technologies from various players (UNC, ODU, RPI and Kitware). But we may decide whether or not, you guys would need to port the stuff on a multi-core CPU or GPU, to meet the performance goals. As you know, that developing and integrating code for GPUs can increase the system complexity considerably. As far as our work is work, designing good algorithms for CPUs and GPUs is a very different task.
|