MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127164995 · doi:10.1109/tvcg.2010.230

Representativity for Robust and Adaptive Multiple Importance Sampling

2010· article· en· W2127164995 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalComputer Research Institute of Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstimatorRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceRendering (computer graphics)Importance samplingAdaptive samplingAlgorithmMathematical optimizationVariance reductionData miningStatisticsArtificial intelligenceMathematicsMonte Carlo method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a general method enhancing the robustness of estimators based on multiple importance sampling (MIS) in a numerical integration context. MIS minimizes variance of estimators for a given sampling configuration, but when this configuration is less adapted to the integrand, the resulting estimator suffers from extra variance. We address this issue by introducing the notion of "representativity" of a sampling strategy, and demonstrate how it can be used to increase robustness of estimators, by adapting them to the integrand. We first show how to compute representativities using common rendering informations such as BSDF, photon maps, or caches in order to choose the best sampling strategy for MIS. We then give hints to generalize our method to any integration problem and demonstrate that it can be used successfully to enhance robustness in different common rendering algorithms.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it