Ray Tracing Intersection Testing for Axis-Aligned Boxes

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing ray tracing systems face significant computational challenges in performing intersection tests, particularly with axis-aligned bounding boxes, due to the large number of tests required, which affects performance, power consumption, and physical size, especially in real-time rendering applications.

Innovation Solution

A method and module for determining whether a ray intersects a three-dimensional axis-aligned box by calculating scaled inverse ray components and culling distances, allowing for early rejection tests to reduce the number of intersection tests through parallel processing and simplified calculations.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If traditional intersection testing methods are used for axis-aligned boxes, then the number of intersection tests is large, but this increases computational time and power consumption

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverendering speedVSAvoidpower consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSUse of energy by stationary object

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies preliminary action by performing early rejection tests before the main intersection testing. It calculates scaled inverse ray components and culling distances in advance to determine whether a ray can be rejected before performing the full intersection test with the axis-aligned box. This preliminary filtering reduces the number of expensive intersection tests that need to be performed, thereby decreasing power consumption while maintaining rendering productivity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Reliability

If more intersection tests are performed to ensure accuracy, then rendering quality is maintained, but latency increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveintersection test accuracyVSAvoidlatency
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent performs preliminary calculations of scaled inverse ray components and culling distances before the main intersection testing. This allows the system to quickly determine whether a ray should be rejected without performing the full expensive intersection test, thereby reducing latency while maintaining accuracy through the use of properly scaled and validated test criteria.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the parameters used in intersection testing by introducing scaled inverse ray components (ρu, ρv, ρw) and scaled culling distances (tmin,scaled, tmax,scaled). These transformed parameters allow for more efficient comparison operations that reduce the number of tests needed while maintaining the same accuracy thresholds, thereby reducing latency without sacrificing reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Measurement precision

If complex intersection testing algorithms are implemented, then testing precision is improved, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveintersection detection precisionVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent simplifies the intersection testing algorithm by transforming the ray and box parameters into scaled forms (scaled inverse ray components and scaled culling distances). This parameter transformation converts complex intersection tests into simpler comparison operations, reducing the computational complexity of the device while maintaining measurement precision through the mathematical equivalence of the transformed parameters.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent extracts the complex intersection testing functionality into a dedicated intersection testing module that operates independently from the main rendering pipeline. This modular extraction allows the complex testing logic to be isolated and optimized separately, reducing the overall system complexity while maintaining precision through the extracted specialized functionality.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

4Productivity

If hardware resources are allocated for intersection testing, then rendering performance improves, but silicon area increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverendering throughputVSAvoidsilicon area
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSArea of stationary object

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements preliminary action through early rejection testing that performs simple comparisons of scaled culling distances before the main intersection testing. This allows the hardware to quickly reject non-intersecting rays using minimal computational resources, improving rendering throughput without requiring large hardware allocations for complex intersection testing of all rays, thereby reducing the required silicon area.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentEP4064204B1Intersection testing in a ray tracing system
Publication Date: 2025.06.25 IMAGINATION TECH LTD
  • EP4064204B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4064204B1 patent drawingFigure 2a~2b
  • EP4064204B1 patent drawingFigure 3a

AI summary

A method and intersection testing module are provided in a ray tracing system for determining whether a ray intersects a 3D axis-aligned box. The box represents a volume defined by a front-facing plane and a back-facing plane for each dimension. Scaled inverse ray components ρu and ρv are determined, wherein ρu = ADwDu and ρv=ADwDv, wherein a third scaled inverse ray component ρw=ADwDw=A. Dw is the major component of the ray direction vector such that |Dw| ≥ |Du| and |Dw| ≥ |Dv|. A scaled minimum culling distance, tmin,scaled, is determined using a result of multiplying an unscaled minimum culling distance for the ray, tmin,unscaled, by the magnitude of ADw. A scaled maximum culling distance, tmax,scaled, is determined using a result of multiplying an unscaled maximum culling distance for the ray, tmax,unscated, by the magnitude of ADw. Scaled intersection distances to the planes defining the box are determined using the scaled inverse ray components. The largest of the determined scaled intersection distances to a front-facing plane of the box is identified. The smallest of the determined scaled intersection distances to a back-facing plane of the box is identified. It is determined whether: (i) the identified largest scaled intersection distance to a front-facing plane of the box is no greater than the identified smallest scaled intersection distance to a back-facing plane of the box; (ii) the identified largest scaled intersection distance to a front-facing plane of the box is no greater than the scaled maximum culling distance, tmax,scaled; and (ii) the identified smallest scaled intersection distance to a back-facing plane of the box is no less than the scaled minimum culling distance, tmin,scaled. It is determined that the ray intersects the box if all of the three determinations (i) to (iii) are satisfied, and it is determined that the ray misses the box if one or more of the three determinations (i) to (iii) are not satisfied.