Skip to main content

A personal annotations of Veach's thesis (18) pp.264-267

p.264 Balance heuristic 1

Equation 9.8's weight is quite similar to the weight used in my favorite operator, Laplacian operator. Here Veach said this is heuristic, but I see this condition is carefully chosen. There are positivity and partition of unity. Following these conditions, we can guarantee the solution's sup and inf can not be out of range of the value of the sampling values. It might be misleading, but, briefly speaking, this operator is an extension of averaging. One amazing property of average is the average never over the maximal value and never less than the minimal value. For example, the average of 5 and 10 is in-between 5 and 10, never larger than 10, never less than 10. You might hear I said something so simple in too complicated way. But, this property is still valid when these weights are applied in here. (9.8's weight gives us Affine combination of the samples.) If you think about the weights, you might need to think that these property can be kept or not. This is kind of natural that when we combine several solutions, this is great of this paper.

p.267 Balance heuristic 2

Figure 9.3 is the pseudo code of balance heuristic estimator.



I would like to add some annotation of this pseudo code since I think this code is important.

  •  i means i-th sampling technique. k is also used as k-th sampling technique, but this is used to distinguish different iteration.
  •  n is number of sampling techniques. Therefore, i = 1, 2, ..., n. k is also the same.
  •  n_i is the number of samples of i-th sampling techniques. Therefore, the line 2's N is total number of samples. For example, technique 1 samples 5, technique 2 samples 3, then n_1 = 5, n_2 = 3, N = 8.
  • p_i is the probability function of i-th sampling technique.
  • X is a sampling point.
Acknowledgements
As usual, thanks to Leo.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why A^{T}A is invertible? (2) Linear Algebra

Why A^{T}A has the inverse Let me explain why A^{T}A has the inverse, if the columns of A are independent. First, if a matrix is n by n, and all the columns are independent, then this is a square full rank matrix. Therefore, there is the inverse. So, the problem is when A is a m by n, rectangle matrix.  Strang's explanation is based on null space. Null space and column space are the fundamental of the linear algebra. This explanation is simple and clear. However, when I was a University student, I did not recall the explanation of the null space in my linear algebra class. Maybe I was careless. I regret that... Explanation based on null space This explanation is based on Strang's book. Column space and null space are the main characters. Let's start with this explanation. Assume  x  where x is in the null space of A .  The matrices ( A^{T} A ) and A share the null space as the following: This means, if x is in the null space of A , x is also in the null spa

Gauss's quote for positive, negative, and imaginary number

Recently I watched the following great videos about imaginary numbers by Welch Labs. https://youtu.be/T647CGsuOVU?list=PLiaHhY2iBX9g6KIvZ_703G3KJXapKkNaF I like this article about naming of math by Kalid Azad. https://betterexplained.com/articles/learning-tip-idea-name/ Both articles mentioned about Gauss, who suggested to use other names of positive, negative, and imaginary numbers. Gauss wrote these names are wrong and that is one of the reason people didn't get why negative times negative is positive, or, pure positive imaginary times pure positive imaginary is negative real number. I made a few videos about explaining why -1 * -1 = +1, too. Explanation: why -1 * -1 = +1 by pattern https://youtu.be/uD7JRdAzKP8 Explanation: why -1 * -1 = +1 by climbing a mountain https://youtu.be/uD7JRdAzKP8 But actually Gauss's insight is much powerful. The original is in the Gauß, Werke, Bd. 2, S. 178 . Hätte man +1, -1, √-1) nicht positiv, negative, imaginäre (oder gar um

Why parallelogram area is |ad-bc|?

Here is my question. The area of parallelogram is the difference of these two rectangles (red rectangle - blue rectangle). This is not intuitive for me. If you also think it is not so intuitive, you might interested in my slides. I try to explain this for hight school students. Slides:  A bit intuitive (for me) explanation of area of parallelogram  (to my site, external link) .