skip to main content
10.1145/3550469.3555388acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagessiggraph-asiaConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Marginal Multiple Importance Sampling

Published:30 November 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

Multiple importance sampling (MIS) is a powerful tool to combine different sampling techniques in a provably good manner. MIS requires that the techniques’ probability density functions (PDFs) are readily evaluable point-wise. However, this requirement may not be satisfied when (some of) those PDFs are marginals, i.e., integrals of other PDFs. We generalize MIS to combine samples from such marginal PDFs. The key idea is to consider each marginalization domain as a continuous space of sampling techniques with readily evaluable (conditional) PDFs. We stochastically select techniques from these spaces and combine the samples drawn from them into an unbiased estimator. Prior work has dealt with the special cases of multiple classical techniques or a single marginal one. Our formulation can handle mixtures of those.

We apply our marginal MIS formulation to light-transport simulation to demonstrate its utility. We devise a marginal path sampling framework that makes previously intractable sampling techniques practical and significantly broadens the path-sampling choices beyond what is presently possible. We highlight results from two algorithms based on marginal MIS: a novel formulation of path-space filtering at multiple vertices along a camera path and a similar filtering method for photon-density estimation.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

3550469.3555388.mp4

mp4

463.9 MB

References

  1. Pablo Bauszat, Victor Petitjean, and Elmar Eisemann. 2017. Gradient-Domain Path Reusing. ACM Trans. Graph. 36, 6, Article Article 229 (Nov. 2017), 9 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3130800.3130886Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Philippe Bekaert, Mateu Sbert, and John Halton. 2002. Accelerating Path Tracing by Re-Using Paths. In Proceedings of the 13th Eurographics Workshop on Rendering. Eurographics Association, 125–134.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Xi Deng, Miloš Hašan, Nathan Carr, Zexiang Xu, and Steve Marschner. 2021. Path Graphs: Iterative Path Space Filtering. ACM Trans. Graph. 40, 6, Article 276 (dec 2021), 15 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3478513.3480547Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Iliyan Georgiev, Jaroslav Křivánek, Tomáš Davidovič, and Philipp Slusallek. 2012. Light Transport Simulation with Vertex Connection and Merging. 31, 6 (Nov. 2012), 192:1–192:10. https://doi.org/10/gbb6q7Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Toshiya Hachisuka, Shinji Ogaki, and Henrik Wann Jensen. 2008. Progressive Photon Mapping. 27, 5 (Dec. 2008), 130:1–130:8. https://doi.org/10/cn8h39Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Toshiya Hachisuka, Jacopo Pantaleoni, and Henrik Wann Jensen. 2012. A Path Space Extension for Robust Light Transport Simulation. 31, 6 (Jan. 2012), 191:1–191:10. https://doi.org/10/gbb6n3Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Henrik Wann Jensen. 1996. The Photon Map in Global Illumination. Ph.D. Thesis. Technical University of Denmark.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. James T. Kajiya. 1986. The Rendering Equation. 20, 4 (Aug. 1986), 143–150. https://doi.org/10/cvf53jGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Alexander Keller, Ken Dahm, and Nikolaus Binder. 2014. Path Space Filtering(SIGGRAPH ’14). ACM, 68:1–68:1. https://doi.org/10/gfz6mrGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Zackary Misso, Benedikt Bitterli, Iliyan Georgiev, and Wojciech Jarosz. 2022. Unbiased and consistent rendering using biased estimators. ACM Transactions on Graphics (Proceedings of SIGGRAPH) 41, 4 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1145/3528223.3530160Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Hao Qin, Xin Sun, Qiming Hou, Baining Guo, and Kun Zhou. 2015. Unbiased Photon Gathering for Light Transport Simulation. ACM Trans. Graph. 34, 6, Article 208 (Oct. 2015), 14 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/2816795.2818119Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Eric Veach. 1997. Robust Monte Carlo Methods for Light Transport Simulation. Ph.D. Thesis. Stanford University, United States – California.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Eric Veach and Leonidas J. Guibas. 1995. Optimally Combining Sampling Techniques for Monte Carlo Rendering, Vol. 29. 419–428. https://doi.org/10/d7b6n4Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Rex West, Iliyan Georgiev, Adrien Gruson, and Toshiya Hachisuka. 2020. Continuous Multiple Importance Sampling. ACM Transactions on Graphics (Proceedings of SIGGRAPH) 39, 4 (July 2020). https://doi.org/10.1145/3386569.3392436Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Marginal Multiple Importance Sampling

    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
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      SA '22: SIGGRAPH Asia 2022 Conference Papers
      November 2022
      482 pages
      ISBN:9781450394703
      DOI:10.1145/3550469

      Copyright © 2022 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 30 November 2022

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate178of869submissions,20%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format