We have a new world champion and reigning king (we recommend running your mouse over him many times in homage):
The final results are:
Score Name & Lab ================================================ 254.00 Hanspeter Pfister, Beerflakes 207.00 Aaron Hertzmann, RSI Research Institute 206.00 Matt Pharr, Encore No. 1 204.00 Tim Purcell 191.00 David Salesin, Graphics Small Caps 177.00 Gary Yngve, Phunkadelic 176.00 Peter Shirley, Shirley by Pharr 150.00 Hector Yee, Generic Lab 144.00 Justin Legakis 125.00 Anton Kirczenow, Cornelius Graphics Inc.
These results are derived from the SIGGRAPH papers and sketches. Here are summaries of SIGGRAPH 2001 paper and sketch titles and authors (well, first authors for sketches (well, "presenters" for sketches, they're not papers)).
Tempest in a Teapot: 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 48.57 points this year. David Salesin and David Bourguignon 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 four score additions: +0, +5.714, +17.32174/+28.53913, and +48.57, each with an equal probability. Therefore the new rankings are, for the highest eleven of the top ten labs:
Score Name & Lab ================================================ 254.00 Hanspeter Pfister, Beerflakes 239.57 David "Rockefeller" Salesin, Graphics Small Caps 208.32 David "Inflation" Salesin, Graphics Small Caps 207.00 Aaron Hertzmann, RSI Research Institute 206.00 Matt Pharr, Encore No. 1 204.00 Tim Purcell 196.71 David "Iron Law of Wages" Salesin, Graphics Small Caps 191.00 David "Kafka" Salesin, Graphics Small Caps 177.00 Gary Yngve, Phunkadelic 176.00 Peter Shirley, Shirley by Pharr 153.57 David "Rockefeller" Bourguignon, Tasty Frogs R&D 150.00 Hector Yee, Generic Lab 144.00 Justin Legakis 133.53 David "Inflation" Bourguignon, Tasty Frogs R&D 125.00 Anton Kirczenow, Cornelius Graphics Inc.So David Salesin is in 2nd/2nd/5th/5th, i.e. (2+2+5+5)/4 = 3.5th place. Aaron Hertzmann is in 3rd/3rd/2nd/2nd place, i.e. 2.5th place, Matt is in 3.5th place, and Tim is in 4.5th place. Gary and Peter are in places where the quantum function collapsed, they're at 6th and 7th. Simple, neh? David Bourguignon then confuses things for the next 11 places (there's a three-way tie at 105 points) and I think he has 11.75th place overall. Which of course makes no sense: we then have a first place winner, Aaron at 2.5th place, Matt and David Salesin tied at 3.5th, but such is the wacky world of quantum computer, FGL-style.
Hanspeter Pfister picked a pack of perfect people (I just had to say that):
## Cost Value Name ================================================ 1 30 15.00 Hanspeter Pfister 2 30 50.00 Ronald Perry 3 15 70.00 Sarah F. Frisken 4 25 45.00 Markus H. Gross 5 15 15.00 Matthias Zwicker 6 15 15.00 Jeroen van Baar 7 30 12.00 Leonard McMillan 8 140 20.00 Peter Schröder 9 45 0.00 Aaron W.F. Lee 10 10 12.00 Chris Buehler 11 20 0.00 Ramesh Raskar 12 25 0.00 Brian Guenter
We caught up with the now-famous Pfister in his newly-acquired mountaintop underwater lair. He took a few minutes off from finishing work on his mind control laser array to answer a few questions.
Q: First, to what do you owe your incredible success? Is it from powers beyond
the ken of mortal man, a pact with the devil, or exposure to beryllium rays
when you were a youngster that also let you grow your hair curlier than usual?
A: My hair is straight, so I guess it must be all the beer I drank that
gave me super powers. Note to my fans: Drink lots of <shameless plug for
a brand of import beer deleted>.
Q: Is "Pfister" physically possible to pronounce?
Only after a good night of drinking. Or if you sneeze.
Q: How are you enjoying your prizes, the platinum statue and the red Ferrari?
The man said he would deliver them by the end of last month, so you have
had enough time to get used to them.
I had to temporarily store them in my airplane hangar. My driver
couldn't fit the Ferrari in our garage and the statue didn't look good
next to all my antiques. Next month I will sell the Aston Martin to make
room for the Ferrari, and once we ship the David back to Italy we'll
display the... hem... platinum teapot. Thanks.
Q: You picked yourself to be on your own team. Interestingly enough, 5 other
players picked you to be on their teams, including Matt Pharr (and myself,
Eric Haines). Will you now ask your boss for a raise?
My boss said that a raise is out of the question, but I don't have to
serve him coffee anymore. One step at a time...
Q: How many six-cent stamps make a dozen?
What is a "cent"?
Q: Any last comments for your adoring fans and demoralized foes?
"I'll be back!"
Way Too Many Statistics
72 research labs were formed this year (i.e. there were 72 contestants, to put it more vulgarly). Average team value was 74.490079365079 points, with 66.712301587301 points from papers and 7.777777777778 for sketches. 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 fifteen most valuable (in raw points) researchers were:
### Value Cost Efficiency Name =============================================== 381 106.00 220 0.4818 Pat Hanrahan 425 70.00 15 4.6667 Sarah F. Frisken 57 60.00 30 2.0000 Bruno Lévy 404 60.00 75 0.8000 Ravi Ramamoorthi 168 60.00 100 0.6000 Greg Turk 482 60.00 110 0.5455 Victor Ostromoukhov 416 50.00 30 1.6667 Ronald Perry 188 48.57 60 0.8095 Heung-Yeung Shum 446 47.00 75 0.6267 Steven J. Gortler 335 45.00 15 3.0000 Mathieu Desbrun 330 45.00 25 1.8000 Markus H. Gross 198 45.00 30 1.5000 Ingrid Carlbom 183 45.00 40 1.1250 Henrik Wann Jensen 264 45.00 75 0.6000 Julie Dorsey 315 45.00 160 0.2812 Marc LevoyEveryone else's value is 40 points or less. Sarah Frisken's two sketches increased her value by 40 points, which helped give Hanspeter the burst of energy he needed to birdie a touchdown on the final lap, or something. Here's the full list.
The top twelve most efficient researchers (highest benefit/cost ratio) were:
### Value Cost Efficiency Name ============================================= 486 30.00 5 6.0000 W. Freeman 425 70.00 15 4.6667 Sarah F. Frisken 508 30.00 10 3.0000 Y. Parish 335 45.00 15 3.0000 Mathieu Desbrun 199 30.00 15 2.0000 Irfan Essa 202 40.00 20 2.0000 J.P. Lewis 265 20.00 10 2.0000 Justin Legakis 118 20.00 10 2.0000 Dirk Bartz 69 20.00 10 2.0000 Chris Tchou 29 20.00 10 2.0000 Anthony Steed 57 60.00 30 2.0000 Bruno LévyAaron Hertzmann and David Salesin both scored with W. Freeman. Hanspeter Pfister was the only one to select Sarah Frisken for his lab.Everyone else's efficiency is 3.0 or less. It is interesting how the highest cost was only 30 quatloos. If these 12 were made a lab, they would cost only 155 Quatloos but be worth 405 points. Beats me what the optimal team is this year. If you feel like figuring it out, here's the full list, and here's the alphabetical list of all researchers in the money (if not in the points).
Here's lots of links to keep you happy:
If you notice any screw-ups, let Eric know.