A very obscure question but maybe someone will know the answer.

I have created view matrix files with the same rfluxmtx command and materials and scene geometry, but the files come out noticeably different between MS Windows and Linux (different machines for both). I've compared the numbers. It seems to be more than just due to just the Monte Carlo method because if I re-run the command on the same machine, the VMXs do not differ by that much, if at all.

Does it have to do with the precision of Windows vs Linux? Maybe the "random" function inherent to rfluxmtx is machine dependent (as it can be in C++ if you don't seed it.).

here are the commands (originally from OS Radiance measure but I am using them on the command line). Of course in Linux it's cat instead of type and the \ become /. Also, I copied the folders directly from the first machine (Windows) to the second machine (Lubuntu).

type "materials\materials_vmx.rad" scene\shades\WG10_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG11_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG12_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG1_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG2_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG3_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG4_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG5_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG6_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG7_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG8_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG9_SHADE.rad > receivers_vmx.rad

oconv materials\materials.rad scene\090_10_Wn_Spc.rad scene\090_20_Wn_Spc.rad scene\090_30_Wn_Spc.rad scene\090_40_Wn_Spc.rad scene\180_10_Wn_Spc.rad scene\180_20_Wn_Spc.rad scene\180_30_Wn_Spc.rad scene\180_40_Wn_Spc.rad scene\270_10_Wn_Spc.rad scene\270_20_Wn_Spc.rad scene\270_30_Wn_Spc.rad scene\270_40_Wn_Spc.rad > octrees\model_vmx.oct

rfluxmtx -ab 6 -ad 4050 -as 256 -dj 1 -dp 1 -dt 0 -dc 1 -lw 0.001  -n 1 -ds .15 -faa -y 594 -I -v - receivers_vmx.rad -i octrees\model_vmx.oct < numeric\merged_space.map

A very obscure question but maybe someone will know the answer.

I have created view matrix files with the same rfluxmtx command and materials and scene geometry, but the files come out noticeably different between MS Windows and Linux (different machines for both). I've compared the numbers. It seems to be more than just due to just the Monte Carlo method because if I re-run the command on the same machine, the VMXs do not differ by that much, if at all.

Does it have to do with the precision of Windows vs Linux? Maybe the "random" function inherent to rfluxmtx is machine dependent (as it can be in C++ if you don't seed it.).

type "materials\materials_vmx.rad" scene\shades\WG10_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG11_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG12_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG1_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG2_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG3_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG4_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG5_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG6_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG7_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG8_SHADE.rad scene\shades\WG9_SHADE.rad > receivers_vmx.rad

oconv materials\materials.rad scene\090_10_Wn_Spc.rad scene\090_20_Wn_Spc.rad scene\090_30_Wn_Spc.rad scene\090_40_Wn_Spc.rad scene\180_10_Wn_Spc.rad scene\180_20_Wn_Spc.rad scene\180_30_Wn_Spc.rad scene\180_40_Wn_Spc.rad scene\270_10_Wn_Spc.rad scene\270_20_Wn_Spc.rad scene\270_30_Wn_Spc.rad scene\270_40_Wn_Spc.rad > octrees\model_vmx.oct

rfluxmtx -ab 6 -ad 4050 -as 256 -dj 1 -dp 1 -dt 0 -dc 1 -lw 0.001  -n 1 -ds .15 -faa -y 594 -I -v - receivers_vmx.rad -i octrees\model_vmx.oct < numeric\merged_space.map