skip to main content
research-article
Open Access

Fast diffraction pathfinding for dynamic sound propagation

Published:19 July 2021Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

In the context of geometric acoustic simulation, one of the more perceptually important yet difficult to simulate acoustic effects is diffraction, a phenomenon that allows sound to propagate around obstructions and corners. A significant bottleneck in real-time simulation of diffraction is the enumeration of high-order diffraction propagation paths in scenes with complex geometry (e.g. highly tessellated surfaces). To this end, we present a dynamic geometric diffraction approach that consists of an extensive mesh preprocessing pipeline and complementary runtime algorithm. The preprocessing module identifies a small subset of edges that are important for diffraction using a novel silhouette edge detection heuristic. It also extends these edges with planar diffraction geometry and precomputes a graph data structure encoding the visibility between the edges. The runtime module uses bidirectional path tracing against the diffraction geometry to probabilistically explore potential paths between sources and listeners, then evaluates the intensities for these paths using the Uniform Theory of Diffraction. It uses the edge visibility graph and the A* pathfinding algorithm to robustly and efficiently find additional high-order diffraction paths. We demonstrate how this technique can simulate 10th-order diffraction up to 568 times faster than the previous state of the art, and can efficiently handle large scenes with both high geometric complexity and high numbers of sources.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

a138-schissler.mp4
3450626.3459751.mp4

References

  1. Paul T Calamia and U Peter Svensson. 2005. Edge subdivision for fast diffraction calculations. In IEEE Workshop on Applications of Signal Processing to Audio and Acoustics, 2005. IEEE, 187--190.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Chunxiao Cao, Zhong Ren, Carl Schissler, Dinesh Manocha, and Kun Zhou. 2016. Interactive sound propagation with bidirectional path tracing. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 35, 6 (2016), 1--11.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Anish Chandak, Christian Lauterbach, Micah Taylor, Zhimin Ren, and Dinesh Manocha. 2008. Ad-frustum: Adaptive frustum tracing for interactive sound propagation. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 14, 6 (2008), 1707--1722.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Brent Cowan and Bill Kapralos. 2015. Interactive rate acoustical occlusion/diffraction modeling for 2D virtual environments & games. In 2015 6th International Conference on Information, Intelligence, Systems and Applications (IISA). IEEE, 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Pedro F Felzenszwalb and Daniel P Huttenlocher. 2004. Efficient graph-based image segmentation. International journal of computer vision 59, 2 (2004), 167--181.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Thomas Funkhouser, Nicolas Tsingos, Ingrid Carlbom, Gary Elko, Mohan Sondhi, James E West, Gopal Pingali, Patrick Min, and Addy Ngan. 2004. A beam tracing method for interactive architectural acoustics. The Journal of the acoustical society of America 115, 2 (2004), 739--756.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Michael Garland and Paul S Heckbert. 1997. Surface simplification using quadric error metrics. In Proceedings of the 24th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques. 209--216.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Iliyan Georgiev. 2012. Implementing vertex connection and merging. Technical Report. Saarland University (2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Peter E Hart, Nils J Nilsson, and Bertram Raphael. 1968. A formal basis for the heuristic determination of minimum cost paths. IEEE transactions on Systems Science and Cybernetics 4, 2 (1968), 100--107.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Claudia Hendrix and Woodrow Barfield. 1996. The sense of presence within auditory virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments 5, 3 (1996), 290--301.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Jan Hradek, Martin Kuchař, and Vaclav Skala. 2003. Hash functions and triangular mesh reconstruction. Computers & geosciences 29, 6 (2003), 741--751.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Chris Joslin and Nadia Magnenat-Thalmann. 2003. Significant facet retrieval for realtime 3d sound rendering in complex virtual environments. In Proceedings of the ACM symposium on Virtual reality software and technology. 15--21.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Robert G Kouyoumjian and Prabhakar H Pathak. 1974. A uniform geometrical theory of diffraction for an edge in a perfectly conducting surface. Proc. IEEE 62, 11 (1974), 1448--1461.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Alexander Lindau and Stefan Weinzierl. 2012. Assessing the Plausibility of Virtual Acoustic Environments. Acta Acustica united with Acustica 98, 5 (2012), 804--810.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Amazon Lumberyard. 2017. Amazon Lumberyard Bistro, Open Research Content Archive (ORCA). (July 2017). http://developer.nvidia.com/orca/amazon-lumberyard-bistroGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Morgan McGuire. 2017. Computer Graphics Archive. (July 2017). https://casual-effects.com/dataGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Sönke Pelzer and Michael Vorländer. 2010. Frequency-and time-dependent geometry for real-time auralizations. In Proceedings of 20th International Congress on Acoustics, ICA. 1--7.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Louis Pisha, Siddharth Atre, John Burnett, and Shahrokh Yadegari. 2020. Approximate diffraction modeling for real-time sound propagation simulation. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 148, 4 (2020), 1922--1933.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Alexander Pohl. 2014. Simulation of diffraction based on the uncertainty relation. (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Nikunj Raghuvanshi and John Snyder. 2014. Parametric wave field coding for pre-computed sound propagation. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 33, 4 (2014), 1--11.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Nikunj Raghuvanshi, John Tennant, and John Snyder. 2017. Triton: Practical pre-computed sound propagation for games and virtual reality. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 141, 5 (2017), 3455--3455.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Atul Rungta, Carl Schissler, Nicholas Rewkowski, Ravish Mehra, and Dinesh Manocha. 2018. Diffraction kernels for interactive sound propagation in dynamic environments. IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics 24, 4 (2018), 1613--1622.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Lauri Savioja and U Peter Svensson. 2015. Overview of geometrical room acoustic modeling techniques. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 138, 2 (2015), 708--730.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Carl Schissler. 2017. Efficient Interactive Sound Propagation in Dynamic Environments. PhD thesis, UNC Chapel Hill.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Carl Schissler and Dinesh Manocha. 2011. GSound: Interactive sound propagation for games. In AES 41st International Conference: Audio for Games.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Carl Schissler, Ravish Mehra, and Dinesh Manocha. 2014. High-order diffraction and diffuse reflections for interactive sound propagation in large environments. ACM Transactions on Graphics (SIGGRAPH 2014) 33, 4 (2014), 39.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Samuel Siltanen, Tapio Lokki, Lauri Savioja, and Claus Lynge Christensen. 2008. Geometry reduction in room acoustics modeling. Acta Acustica united with Acustica 94, 3 (2008), 410--418.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Uwe M Stephenson. 2004. Beugungssimulation ohne Rechenzeitexplosion: die Methode der quantisierten Pyramidenstrahlen. PhD thesis, RWTH Aachen.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Uwe M Stephenson. 2010. An energetic approach for the simulation of diffraction within ray tracing based on the uncertainty relation. Acta Acustica united with Acustica 96, 3 (2010), 516--535.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Julian Straub, Thomas Whelan, Lingni Ma, Yufan Chen, Erik Wijmans, Simon Green, Jakob J Engel, Raul Mur-Artal, Carl Ren, Shobhit Verma, et al. 2019. The Replica dataset: A digital replica of indoor spaces. arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.05797 (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. U Peter Svensson, Roger I Fred, and John Vanderkooy. 1999. An analytic secondary source model of edge diffraction impulse responses. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 106, 5 (1999), 2331--2344.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Micah Taylor, Anish Chandak, Zhimin Ren, Christian Lauterbach, and Dinesh Manocha. 2009. Fast edge-diffraction for sound propagation in complex virtual environments. In EAA auralization symposium. Citeseer, 15--17.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Rendell R Torres, U Peter Svensson, and Mendel Kleiner. 2001. Computation of edge diffraction for more accurate room acoustics auralization. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 109, 2 (2001), 600--610.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Nicolas Tsingos, Thomas Funkhouser, Addy Ngan, and Ingrid Carlbom. 2001. Modeling acoustics in virtual environments using the Uniform Theory of Diffraction. In Proceedings of the 28th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques. ACM, 545--552.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Eric Veach. 1997. Robust Monte Carlo methods for light transport simulation. Vol. 1610. Stanford University PhD thesis.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Stephan Werner, Florian Klein, Thomas Mayenfels, and Karlheinz Brandenburg. 2016. A summary on acoustic room divergence and its effect on externalization of auditory events. In 2016 Eighth International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX). IEEE, 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Hengchin Yeh, Ravish Mehra, Zhimin Ren, Lakulish Antani, Dinesh Manocha, and Ming Lin. 2013. Wave-ray coupling for interactive sound propagation in large complex scenes. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 32, 6 (2013), 1--11.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Markus Zaunschirm, Christian Schörkhuber, and Robert Höldrich. 2018. Binaural rendering of ambisonic signals by head-related impulse response time alignment and a diffuseness constraint. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 143, 6 (2018), 3616--3627.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Fast diffraction pathfinding for dynamic sound propagation

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image ACM Transactions on Graphics
          ACM Transactions on Graphics  Volume 40, Issue 4
          August 2021
          2170 pages
          ISSN:0730-0301
          EISSN:1557-7368
          DOI:10.1145/3450626
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          Copyright © 2021 Owner/Author

          This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 19 July 2021
          Published in tog Volume 40, Issue 4

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader