A personal annotations of Veach's thesis (20) pp.310-321

p.310 Special cases for short subpaths

There are zero subpaths vertices and one path vertices to generate subpaths. If I draw a picture, there is one line from the lens to the light source. So, I could not distinguish the difference. Again, I asked my friend/specialist. It is quite convenient to have such friends, but, I should study more, otherwise, these friends will be bothered by me. The correct picture is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Short subpath

The differences are:

Zero subpath vertices: The sample is done from the lens only, the probability is only related with lens, and it coincidentally hit to a light source.
One subpath vertices: The sample is done on the light source with sample density probability only. Then this vertex is connected to the lens.

The path's generation probability is not the same, therefore, the contribution is also not the same.

Acknowledgements
Thanks to Leo and Carsten.

p.321 Implementation

It's a bit details, but I have a question in the following equation.

I computed this as follows.

I may have a mistake. Actually, today I write 3 - 4 = 1 and my matrix becomes unsolvable when I try to get a row reduced echelon form. I was astonished when I compare my calculation and the output of the octave. But, still where is N_0?

Comments

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) .

Lx=d: SundayResearch

Search This Blog