Regression-based Monte Carlo integration

Abstract

Monte Carlo integration is typically interpreted as an estimator of the expected value using stochastic samples. There exists an alternative interpretation in calculus where Monte Carlo integration can be seen as estimating a constant function---from the stochastic evaluations of the integrand---that integrates to the original integral. The integral mean value theorem states that this constant function should be the mean (or expectation) of the integrand. Since both interpretations result in the same estimator, little attention has been devoted to the calculus-oriented interpretation. We show that the calculus-oriented interpretation actually implies the possibility of using a more complex function than a constant one to construct a more efficient estimator for Monte Carlo integration. We build a new estimator based on this interpretation and relate our estimator to control variates with least-squares regression on the stochastic samples of the integrand. Unlike prior work, our resulting estimator is provably better than or equal to the conventional Monte Carlo estimator. To demonstrate the strength of our approach, we introduce a practical estimator that can act as a simple drop-in replacement for conventional Monte Carlo integration. We experimentally validate our framework on various light transport integrals. The code is available at https://github.com/iribis/regressionmc.

References

1. Laurent Belcour, Guofu Xie, Christophe Hery, Mark Meyer, Wojciech Jarosz, and Derek Nowrouzezahrai. 2018. Integrating clipped spherical harmonics expansions. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 37, 2 (2018), 1--12.
2. Benedikt Bitterli, Fabrice Rousselle, Bochang Moon, José A. Iglesias-Guitián, David Adler, Kenny Mitchell, Wojciech Jarosz, and Jan Novák. 2016. Nonlinearly Weighted First-Order Regression for Denoising Monte Carlo Renderings. 35, 4 (June 2016), 107--117.
3. Petrik Clarberg and Tomas Akenine-Möller. 2008. Exploiting Visibility Correlation in Direct Illumination. 27, 4 (2008), 1125--1136.
4. Miguel Crespo, Adrian Jarabo, and Adolfo Muñoz. 2021. Primary-Space Adaptive Control Variates Using Piecewise-Polynomial Approximations. ACM Trans. Graph. 40, 3, Article 25 (jul 2021), 15 pages.
5. Philip J Davis. 2013. Methods of numerical integration. Academic, New York; London.
6. Shaohua Fan, Stephen Chenney, Bo Hu, Kam-Wah Tsui, and Yu-Chi Lai. 2006. Optimizing Control Variate Estimators for Rendering. (2006).
7. Peter W. Glynn and Roberto Szechtman. 2002. Some New Perspectives on the Method of Control Variates. In Monte Carlo and Quasi-Monte Carlo Methods 2000, Kai-Tai Fang, Harald Niederreiter, and Fred J. Hickernell (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 27--49.
8. Gaël Guennebaud, Benoît Jacob, et al. 2010. Eigen v3. http://eigen.tuxfamily.org.
9. Jerry Guo, Pablo Bauszat, Jacco Bikker, and Elmar Eisemann. 2018. Primary sample space path guiding. In Eurographics Symposium on Rendering, Vol. 2018. The Eurographics Association, 73--82.
10. Stefan Heinrich. 2001. Multilevel Monte Carlo Methods. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Large-Scale Scientific Computing-RevisedPapers (LSSC '01). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 58--67.
11. Fred J. Hickernell, Christiane Lemieux, and Art B. Owen. 2005. Control Variates for Quasi-Monte Carlo. Statist. Sci. 20, 1 (2005), 1 -- 31.
12. Binh-Son Hua, Adrien Gruson, Victor Petitjean, Matthias Zwicker, Derek Nowrouzezahrai, Elmar Eisemann, and Toshiya Hachisuka. 2019. A Survey on Gradient-Domain Rendering. In Computer Graphics Forum, Vol. 38. Wiley Online Library, 455--472.
13. Csaba Kelemen, László Szirmay-Kalos, György Antal, and Ferenc Csonka. 2002. A Simple and Robust Mutation Strategy for the Metropolis Light Transport Algorithm. 21, 3 (Sept. 2002), 531--540.
14. Alexander Keller. 2001. Hierarchical Monte Carlo Image Synthesis. Math. Comput. Simul. 55, 1--3 (Feb. 2001), 79--92.
15. Ivo Kondapaneni, Petr Vévoda, Pascal Grittmann, Tomas Skrivan, Philipp Slusallek, and Jaroslav Krivanek. 2019. Optimal Multiple Importance Sampling. ACM Transactions on Graphics (Proceedings of SIGGRAPH 2019) 38, 4 (July 2019), 37:1--37:14.
16. Peter Kutz, Ralf Habel, Yining Karl Li, and Jan Novák. 2017. Spectral and decomposition tracking for rendering heterogeneous volumes. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 36, 4 (2017), 1--16.
17. Eric P. Lafortune and Yves D. Willems. 1994. The Ambient Term as a Variance Reducing Technique for Monte Carlo Ray Tracing. 163--171.
18. W. W. Loh. 1995. On the Method of Control Variates. Ph.D. Thesis. Stanford University.
19. Bochang Moon, Nathan Carr, and Sung-Eui Yoon. 2014. Adaptive Rendering Based on Weighted Local Regression. 33, 5 (Sept. 2014), 170:1--170:14.
20. Bochang Moon, Jose A. Iglesias-Guitian, Sung-Eui Yoon, and Kenny Mitchell. 2015. Adaptive Rendering with Linear Predictions. 34, 4 (July 2015), 121:1--121:11.
21. Thomas Müller, Markus Gross, and Jan Novák. 2017. Practical Path Guiding for Efficient Light-Transport Simulation. 36, 4 (June 2017), 91--100.
22. Thomas Müller, Fabrice Rousselle, Alexander Keller, and Jan Novák. 2020. Neural Control Variates. ACM Trans. Graph. 39, 6, Article 243 (Nov. 2020), 19 pages.
23. Yuji Nakatsukasa. 2018. Approximate and integrate: Variance reduction in Monte Carlo integration via function approximation. arXiv:math.NA/1806.05492
24. Harald Niederreiter. 1992. Random Number Generation and Quasi-Monte Carlo Methods. SIAM.
25. Art Owen and Yi Zhou. 2000. Safe and effective importance sampling. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 95, 449 (2000), 135--143.
26. Art B. Owen. 2013. Monte Carlo Theory, Methods and Examples. To be published.
27. Anthony Pajot, Loic Barthe, and Mathias Paulin. 2014. Globally Adaptive Control Variate for Robust Numerical Integration. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing 36, 4 (2014), A1708--A1730.
28. Matt Pharr, Wenzel Jakob, and Greg Humphreys. 2016. Physically Based Rendering: From Theory to Implementation (3 ed.). San Francisco, CA, USA.
29. Fabrice Rousselle, Wojciech Jarosz, and Jan Novák. 2016. Image-Space Control Variates for Rendering. 35, 6 (Nov. 2016), 169:1--169:12.
30. Reuven Y. Rubinstein and Ruth Marcus. 1985. Efficiency of Multivariate Control Variates in Monte Carlo Simulation. (1985).
31. Kartic Subr. 2021. Q-NET: A Network for Low-dimensional Integrals of Neural Proxies. In Computer Graphics Forum, Vol. 40. Wiley Online Library, 61--71.
32. Lloyd N. Trefethen. 2012. Approximation Theory and Approximation Practice (Other Titles in Applied Mathematics). Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, USA.
33. Eric Veach. 1997. Robust Monte Carlo Methods for Light Transport Simulation. Ph.D. Thesis. Stanford University, United States - California.
34. Eric Veach and Leonidas J. Guibas. 1995. Optimally Combining Sampling Techniques for Monte Carlo Rendering, Vol. 29. 419--428.
35. Petr Vévoda, Ivo Kondapaneni, and Jaroslav Křivánek. 2018. Bayesian online regression for adaptive direct illumination sampling. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 37, 4 (2018), 1--12.
36. Jiří Vorba, Ondřej Karlík, Martin Šik, Tobias Ritschel, and Jaroslav Křivánek. 2014. On-Line Learning of Parametric Mixture Models for Light Transport Simulation. 33, 4 (Aug. 2014), 101:1--101:11.
37. Quan Zheng and Matthias Zwicker. 2019. Learning to importance sample in primary sample space. In Computer Graphics Forum, Vol. 38. Wiley Online Library, 169--179.
38. Matthias Zwicker, Wojciech Jarosz, Jaakko Lehtinen, Bochang Moon, Ravi Ramamoorthi, Fabrice Rousselle, Pradeep Sen, Cyril Soler, and Sung-Eui Yoon. 2015. Recent Advances in Adaptive Sampling and Reconstruction for Monte Carlo Rendering. 34, 2 (May 2015), 667--681.

Index Terms

• Computing methodologies

  • Computer graphics

    • Rendering