The initial results are in from the judges, and, Oh. My. Golly. It's Matt Pharr again; incredible:
Score Name & Lab ================================================ 206.00 Matt Pharr, Encore No. 1 204.00 Tim Purcell 194.00 Hanspeter Pfister, Beerflakes 191.00 David Salesin, Graphics Small Caps 187.00 Aaron Hertzmann, RSI Research Institute 176.00 Peter Shirley, Shirley by Pharr 150.00 Hector Yee, Generic Lab 137.00 Gary Yngve, Phunkadelic 125.00 Anton Kirczenow, Cornelius Graphics Inc. 124.00 Justin LegakisThese results are derived from the SIGGRAPH papers (and here's a handy summary of titles and authors). The SIGGRAPH sketches are worth 20 points for the first author of the sketch, so the contest is not over yet. Sketches will be posted May 21st, so we will not know until then.
Late-breaking controversy: There was an error in the database of contestants. It turns out Harry Shum and Heung-Yeung Shum are the same person. Harry is listed as costing 15 Quatloos, Heung-Yeung as 60. Harry/Heung-Yeung was worth 28.57 points this year. David Salesin and David Bourguigon hired Harry Shum for 15 Quatloos. So what's fair? We could
If this contest actually mattered in some way then we'd probably go with the "fair wages" method. However, in the interests of causing chaos and controversy, while accentuating the judges' location on the evolutionary ladder as invertebrates... What I meant to say is that, in this post-modern world, who can really say who the winner is? And Everett's many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics allows for multiple winners - yeah, that's the ticket. So, the solution is to award the Davids three score additions: +0, +5.714, and +28.57, each with an equal probability. Therefore, effective immediately, the new rankings are:
Score Name & Lab ================================================ 219.57 David "Rockefeller" Salesin, Graphics Small Caps 206.00 Matt Pharr, Encore No. 1 204.00 Tim Purcell 196.71 David "Iron Law of Wages" Salesin, Graphics Small Caps 194.00 Hanspeter Pfister, Beerflakes 191.00 David "Kafka" Salesin, Graphics Small Caps 187.00 Aaron Hertzmann, RSI Research Institute 176.00 Peter Shirley, Shirley by Pharr 150.00 Hector Yee, Generic Lab 137.00 Gary Yngve, Phunkadelic 125.00 Anton Kirczenow, Cornelius Graphics Inc. 124.00 Justin LegakisSo at this point David Salesin is in 1st/3rd/4th, i.e. (1+3+4)/3 = 2.333rd place. Matt Pharr is in 1st/1st/2nd, i.e. 1.333rd place, Tim is in 2.333rd place also, and Hanspeter is in 3.667th place. Simple, neh?
72 research labs were formed this year (i.e. there were 72 contestants, to put it more vulgarly). Average team value, so far, is 66.7123015873016 points. The most popular researchers picked for labs were:
Picked Name =============================== 15 Wolfgang Heidrich 13 Henrik Wann Jensen 10 Lee Markosian 9 Leonard McMillan 8 Igor Guskov 8 Michael F. Cohen 8 Frédo Durand 8 Peter Shirley 7 Henry Fuchs 7 Ken Perlinwith everyone else chosen 6 or less times.
The top thirteen most valuable (in raw points) researchers were:
### Value Cost Efficiency Name =============================================== 381 106.00 220 0.4818 Pat Hanrahan 404 60.00 75 0.8000 Ravi Ramamoorthi 482 60.00 110 0.5455 Victor Ostromoukhov 57 60.00 30 2.0000 Bruno Lévy 168 60.00 100 0.6000 Greg Turk 446 47.00 75 0.6267 Steven J. Gortler 198 45.00 30 1.5000 Ingrid Carlbom 335 45.00 15 3.0000 Mathieu Desbrun 183 45.00 40 1.1250 Henrik Wann Jensen 330 45.00 25 1.8000 Markus H. Gross 264 45.00 75 0.6000 Julie Dorsey 315 45.00 160 0.2812 Marc Levoy 130 35.00 40 0.8750 Emil PraunEveryone else's value is 30 points or less. Here's the full list.
The top fourteen most efficient researchers (highest benefit/cost ratio) were:
Authors ranked by efficiency ### Value Cost Efficiency Name ============================================= 486 30.00 5 6.0000 W. Freeman 335 45.00 15 3.0000 Mathieu Desbrun 508 30.00 10 3.0000 Y. Parish 265 20.00 10 2.0000 Justin Legakis 199 30.00 15 2.0000 Irfan Essa 57 60.00 30 2.0000 Bruno Lévy 425 30.00 15 2.0000 Sarah F. Frisken 330 45.00 25 1.8000 Markus H. Gross 431 15.00 10 1.5000 Sebastian Fernandez 389 15.00 10 1.5000 Pedro V. Sander 198 45.00 30 1.5000 Ingrid Carlbom 496 15.00 10 1.5000 William Mark 66 12.00 10 1.2000 Chris Buehler 183 45.00 40 1.1250 Henrik Wann JensenEveryone else's efficiency is 1.0 or less. Here's the full list, and here's the alphabetical list of all researchers in the money, as it were. These are not final results, of course.
If you want to look at the original contest rules, regulations, and dosages, click on this colored underlined text right here where your eyes are looking. If you notice any screw-ups, let Eric know. [Thanks to Aaron Hertzmann and Hanspeter Pfister for setting me straight on a couple of ratings, which I've redone. I also revamped my Perl scripts and found a few more goofs. But, if we recount Dade County and tally the folded ballots by hand...]
All for now; this should give you something to chew on while waiting for the sketches results. Will Matt do an n-peat, where n=2? Or will Tim, Hanspeter, David, Aaron, or someone else blast past him in a burst of additive speed? Stay tuned to find out...