Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 378

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Foveated 3D graphics

Guenter, Brian, Finch, Mark, Drucker, Steven, Tan, Desney, Snyder, John·2012·ACM Transactions on Graphics

Abstract

We exploit the falloff of acuity in the visual periphery to accelerate graphics computation by a factor of 5-6 on a desktop HD display (1920x1080). Our method tracks the user's gaze point and renders three image layers around it at progressively higher angular size but lower sampling rate. The three layers are then magnified to display resolution and smoothly composited. We develop a general and efficient antialiasing algorithm easily retrofitted into existing graphics code to minimize "twinkling" artifacts in the lower-resolution layers. A standard psychophysical model for acuity falloff assumes that minimum detectable angular size increases linearly as a function of eccentricity. Given the slope characterizing this falloff, we automatically compute layer sizes and sampling rates. The result looks like a full-resolution image but reduces the number of pixels shaded by a factor of 10-15. We performed a user study to validate these results. It identifies two levels of foveation quality: a more conservative one in which users reported foveated rendering quality as equivalent to or better than non-foveated when directly shown both, and a more aggressive one in which users were unable to correctly label as increasing or decreasing a short quality progression relative to a high-quality foveated reference. Based on this user study, we obtain a slope value for the model of 1.32-1.65 arc minutes per degree of eccentricity. This allows us to predict two future advantages of foveated rendering: (1) bigger savings with larger, sharper displays than exist currently (e.g. 100 times speedup at a field of view of 70° and resolution matching foveal acuity), and (2) a roughly linear (rather than quadratic or worse) increase in rendering cost with increasing display field of view, for planar displays at a constant sharpness.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/2366145.2366183

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 378

Metadata

Authors
Guenter, B., Finch, M., Drucker, S., Tan, D., & Snyder, J.
Venue
ACM Transactions on Graphics
Published
2012-11
Volume
31
Issue
6
Pages
1-10
ISSN
  • 0730-0301 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-7368
OpenAlex
W1968607211
Cited by
378
References
0
FWCI
13.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Foveated 3D graphics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/2366145.2366183
The paper
Guenter, B., Finch, M., Drucker, S., Tan, D., & Snyder, J. (2012). Foveated 3D graphics. ACM Transactions on Graphics. https://doi.org/10.1145/2366145.2366183

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.