Abstract The computational work to perform particle advection‐based flow visualization techniques varies based on many factors, including number of particles, duration, and mesh type. In many cases, the total work is significant, and total execution time (“performance”) is a critical issue. This state‐of‐the‐art report considers existing optimizations for particle advection, using two high‐level categories: algorithmic optimizations and hardware efficiency. The sub‐categories for algorithmic optimizations include solvers, cell locators, I/O efficiency, and precomputation, while the sub‐categories for hardware efficiency all involve parallelism: shared‐memory, distributed‐memory, and hybrid. Finally, this STAR concludes by identifying current gaps in our understanding of particle advection performance and its optimizations.

There are multiple algorithms for parallelizing particle advection for scientific visualization workloads. While many previous studies have contributed to the understanding of individual algorithms, our study aims to provide a holistic understanding of how algorithms perform relative to each other on various workloads. To accomplish this, we consider four popular parallelization algorithms and run a “bake-off” study (i.e., an empirical study) to identify the best matches for each. The study includes 216 tests, going to a concurrency of up to 8192 cores and considering data sets as large as 34 billion cells with 300 million particles. Overall, our study informs three important research questions: (1) which parallelization algorithms perform best for a given workload?, (2) why?, and (3) what are the unsolved problems in parallel particle advection? In terms of findings, we find that the seeding box is the most important factor in choosing the best algorithm, and also that there is a significant opportunity for improvement in execution time, scalability, and efficiency.

We present an algorithm for parallel volume rendering that is a hybrid between classical object order and image order techniques. The algorithm operates on unstructured grids (and structured ones), and thus can deal with block boundaries interleaving in complex ways. It also deals effectively with cases that are prone to load imbalance, i.e., cases where cell sizes differ dramatically, either because of the nature of the input data, or because of the effects of the camera transformation. The algorithm divides work over resources such that each phase of its processing is bounded in the amount of computation it can perform. We demonstrate its efficacy through a series of studies, varying over camera position, data set size, transfer function, image size, and processor count. At its biggest, our experiments scaled up to 8,192 processors and operated on data sets with more than one billion cells. In total, we find that our hybrid algorithm performs well in all cases. This is because our algorithm naturally adapts its computation based on workload, and can operate like either an object order technique or an image order technique in scenarios where those techniques are efficient.