I am wondering how the even-odd algorithm works for identifying a point in a complex polygon.
What I know right now is that it will do the horizontal search from most left to the point and count the number of edges touched.
However, what happens if the edges touched is in an intersection of 2 edges? how does it count?
Example of polygons:
The way I like to do it, which works for integer as well as floating-point coordinates, is:
for non-horizontal segments, each segment includes its bottom-most point but not its top-most point.
do not include the horizontal segments at all in the even-odd count.
This ensures that the even-odd count is correct for every point inside the polygon and every point outside, but it's not entirely consistent about points exactly on the boundary. If it matters to you, you may want to add a rule that any point that is actually on a segment is included in the polygon.
there are more ways of dealing with this problem but the safest I know of is to
Change ray direction slightly
this is numerically safe but implementation is not as easy as it sounds. Either change entire ray and compute from the start or change somewhere before the hit in question.
You need to ensure that you do not form close loops for example by zig zag pattern (so you alternate between turning CW and CCW within some cone from the original direction).
In case where ray is exactly parallel to and also touching an edge of your polygon either ignore such edge or count it twice or change the ray direction again.
Changing ray direction is always safe as it avoids singularities and numerical instabilities.
btw. This inside polygon algorithm you are using is well known by name Hit test
Related
I've implemented a point-in-polygon algorithm based on http://alienryderflex.com/polygon/.
It works fine but, as it says in the article:
If the test point is on the border of the polygon, this algorithm will deliver unpredictable results
It turns out I need the algorithm to return true when the test point is on the border/edge (and the vertices) of the polygon.
Is there either:
An alternative algorithm that will help me; or
A way to modify this algorithm to get what I want (e.g. by expanding the polygon a little bit before running the algorithm)
Expanding the polygon a bit is an option but this can be tricky with concave polygons.
My recommendation would be to shift the point into different directions (up/down/left/right) by a tiny amount and do the calculation for each of these shifted points. Then count it as being inside if at least one of the shifted points is determined to be inside.
Another option is to let the line on which the intersections are counted run in different directions, not only horizontally.
But then it might not be worth the while because, as your linked article states:
"That is not generally a problem, since the edge of the polygon is infinitely thin anyway, and points that fall right on the edge can go either way without hurting the look of the polygon."
I am trying to create an algorithm for 'fleeing' and would like to first find points which are 'safe'. That is to say, points where they are relatively distant from other points.
This is 2D (not that it matters much) and occurs within a fixed sized circle.
I'm guessing the sum of the squared distances would produce a good starting equation, whereby the highest score is the furthest away.
As for picking the points, I do not think it would be possible to solve for X,Y but approximation is sufficient.
I did some reading and determined that in order to cover the area of a circle, you would need 7 half-sized circles (with centers forming a hex, and a seventh at the center)
I could iterate through these, all of which are within the circle to begin with. As I choose the best scoring sphere, I could continue to divide them into 7 spheres. Of course, excluding any points which fall outside the original circle.
I could then iterate to a desired precision or a desired level.
To expand on the approach, the assumption is that it takes time to arrive at a location and while the location may be safe, the trip in between may not. How should I incorporate the distance in the equation so that I arrive at a good solution.
I suppose I could square the distance to the new point and multiply it by the score, and iterate from there. It would strongly favor a local spot, but I imagine that is a good behavior. It would try to resolve a safe spot close by and then upon re-calculating it could find 'outs' and continue to sneak to safety.
Any thoughts on this, or has this problem been done before? I wasn't able to find this problem specifically when I looked.
EDIT:
I've brought in the C# implementation of Fortune's Algorithm, and also added a few points around my points to create a pseudo circular constraint, as I don't understand the algorithm well enough to adjust it manually.
I realize now that the blue lines create a path between nodes. I can use the length of these and the distance between the surrounding points to compute a path (time to traverse and danger) and weigh that against the safety (the empty circle it is trying to get to) to determine what is the best course of action. By playing with how these interact, I can eliminate most of the work I would have had to do, simply by using the voronoi. Also my spawning algorithm will use this now, to determine the LEC and spawn at that spot.
You can take the convex hull of your set of locations - the vertices of the convex hull will give you the set of "most distant" points. Next, take the centroid of the points you're fleeing from, then determine which vertex of the convex hull is the most distant from the centroid. You may be able to speed this up by, for example, dividing the playing field into quadrants - you only need to test the vertices that are in the furthermost quadrant (e.g., if the centroid is in the positive-x positive-y quadrant, then you only need to check the vertices in the negative-x negative-y quadrant); if the playing field is an irregular shape then this may not be an option.
As an alternative to fleeing to the most distant point, if you have a starting point that you're fleeing from (e.g. the points you're fleeing from are enemies, and the player character is currently at point X which denotes its starting point), then rather than have the player flee to the most distant point you can instead have the player follow the trajectory that most quickly takes them from the centroid of the enemies - draw a ray from the enemies' centroid through the player's location, and that ray gives you the direction that the player should flee.
If the player character is surrounded then both of these algorithms will give nonsense results, but in that case the player character doesn't really have any viable options anyway.
Given:
(X,Y) coordinate, which is the position of a vehicle.
Array of (X,Y)'s, which are vertices in a polyline. Note that the polyline consists of straight segments only, no arcs.
What I want:
To calculate whether the vehicle is to the left or to the right of the polyline (or on top, ofcourse).
My approach:
Iterate over all line-segments, and compute the distance to each segment. Then for the closest segment you do a simple left-of test (as explained here for instance).
Possible issues:
When three points form an angle smaller than 90 degrees (such as shown in the image blow), a more complicated scenario arises. When the vehicle is in the red segment as shown below, the closest segment can be either one of the two. However, the left-of test will yield right if the first segment is chosen as the closest segment, and left otherwise. We can easily see (at least, I hope), that the correct result should be that the vehicle is left of the polyline.
My question:
How can I elegantly, but mostly efficiently take care of this specific situation?
My fix so far:
Compute for both segments a point on that segment, starting from the vertex point.
Compute the distance from the vehicle to both of the points, using Euclidian distance
Keep the segment for which the computed point is the closest.
I am not very happy with this fix, because I feel like I am missing a far more elegant solution, my fix feels rather "hacky". Efficiency is key though, because it is used on a realtime embedded system.
Existing codebase is in C++, so if you want to write in a specific language, C++ has my preference.
Thanks!
[edit]
I changed my fix, from a perpendicular point to a parallel point, as I think it is easier to follow the line segment than compute the outward normal.
This topic has been inactive for so long that I believe it's dead. I have a solution though.
However, the left-of test will yield right if the first segment is
chosen as the closest segment, and left otherwise.
You've used slightly ambiguous language. I'm gonna use segments to speak of the line segments in the polyline and quadrants to speak of the areas delimited by them. So in your case, you'd have a red quadrant which seems to be on the right of one segment and on the left of the other.
If the left-of test yields different answers for different segments, you should redo the test on the segments themselves. In your case, you'd have:
The quadrant is on the RIGHT of the first segment
The quadrant is on the LEFT of the second segment
Both segments disagree on where the quadrant lies, so you do two further disambiguation tests:
The second segment is on the RIGHT of the first segment
The first segment is on the RIGHT of the second segment
This allows us to conclude that the second segment is in between the first segment and the quadrant—since each of those two lies on a different side of the second segment. Therefore, the second segment is "closer" to the quadrant than the first and it's answer to the left-right test should be used as the correct one.
(I'm almost sure you can do with only one of the two disambiguation tests, I've put both in for clarity)
For the sake of completeness: I believe this solution also accounts for your demands of efficiency and elegance, since it uses the same method you've been using from the start (the left-of test), so it meets all the conditions specified: it's elegant, it's efficient and it takes care of the problem.
Let infinity = M where M is big enough. You can consider that everything is in the square [-M,M]x[-M,M], split the square with your polyline and you have now two polygons. Then checking if the car is in a given polygon can be done very simply with angles.
I consider that your first point and your last point have M in there coordinates. You may need to add some of these points to have a polygon: (-M,-M), (M,-M), (M,M) and (-M,M).
Once you have a polygon for the left of the polyline, sum the angles OĈP where O is a fixed point, C is the car and P is a point of the polygon. If the sum is 0 then the car is outside of the polygon, else it is inside.
Just a quick idea: would it be possible to connect the last and first vertex of your polyline, so that it would become a polygon? You could then do a simple inside/outside check do determine whether the vehicle is left/right of the line (this ofcourse depends on the direction of the polygon).
However, this method does assume that the polygon is still not self-intersecting after connecting the last and first vertex.
This is a standard sort of problem from computational geometry. Since you're looking to test whether a point (x0, y0) is left-of a given surface (your polyline), you need to identify which segment to test against by its height. One easy way to do this would be to build a tree of the lower point of each segment, and search in that for the test point's predecessor. Once you have that segment, you can do your left-of test directly: if it's left of both endpoints, or between them on the appropriate side, then you return true.
I am assuming here that you guarantee that the vertical extent of your polyline is greater than where you might find your query point, and that the line doesn't overlap itself vertically. The latter assumption might be quite poor.
Expansion in response to OP's comment:
Note that the angle example in the question contradicts the first assumption - the polyline does not reach the height of the search point.
One way to conceptualize my method is by sorting your segments vertically, and then iterating through them comparing your point's y-coordinate against the segments until your point is above the lower endpoint and below the higher endpoint. Then, use the endpoints of the segment to figure out the x-intercept at the given y. If the point has a lower x-cooordinate, it's to the left, and if it has a greater x-coordinate, it's to the right.
There are two ways to improve on this explanation in a real implementation, one of which I mentioned about:
Use a balanced search tree to find the right segment instead of iterating through a sorted list, to bring the time from O(n) to O(log n)
Reconceptualize the search as finding the intersection of the polyline and the horizontal line y = y0 through the search point. Then just compare the x value of the intersection against the search point.
does anybody know of a good algorithm for this task:
a multi polygon contains the reserved areas
find an empty position for the given polygon which is closest to its original position but does not intersect the reserved areas
I have implemented some very basic algorithm which does the job but far from optimally.
Thank You!
Edit:
my solution basically does the following:
move given polygon in all possible directions dx and dy
check wether the new intersection is less than the previous intersection
if so, use new position and make sure that you don't move your polygon back and forth at the same position
repeat these steps a maximum of N times
Example: it is intended for placing text which should not overlap with each other.
One method that immediately pops into my mind is to shoot a ray (i.e. measure a line segment) from the original position to every vertex of the polygon. Do a comparison on those distances, and then based on those comparisons, narrow it down to the minimally far away line segment of the polygon. Compute the perpendicular intersection of that line with the origin, and you'll get the minimally far away point. If the vertex comparisons don't lead you down the right path, just shoot off lines in random directions, and just stop when you're happy with the result. It doesn't sound like you require optimality.
Let's look at the original problem: making sure that one piece of text doesn't overlap another. Presumably this is for labelling a map. The way I do it is this: draw the text invisibly, checking for overlap (by using a specialised graphics context that instead of drawing a pixel, checks whether a pixel is already there) then try another position along the line on which the text is to be placed - usually a street. I try the middle of the line first, then successive positions further and further left and right of the middle. If that fails I try again with a condensed (narrower) font.
Im looking for some fairly easy (I know polygon union is NOT an easy operation but maybe someone could point me in the right direction with a relativly easy one) algorithm on merging two intersecting polygons. Polygons could be concave without holes and also output polygon should not have holes in it. Polygons are represented in counter-clockwise manner. What I mean is presented on a picture. As you can see even if there is a hole in union of polygons I dont need it in the output. Input polygons are for sure without holes. I think without holes it should be easier to do but still I dont have an idea.
Remove all the vertices of the polygons which lie inside the other polygon: http://paulbourke.net/geometry/insidepoly/
Pick a starting point that is guaranteed to be in the union polygon (one of the extremes would work)
Trace through the polygon's edges in counter-clockwise fashion. These are points in your union. Trace until you hit an intersection (note that an edge may intersect with more than one edge of the other polygon).
Find the first intersection (if there are more than one). This is a point in your Union.
Go back to step 3 with the other polygon. The next point should be the point that makes the greatest angle with the previous edge.
You can proceed as below:
First, add to your set of points all the points of intersection of your polygons.
Then I would proceed like graham scan algorithm but with one more constraint.
Instead of selecting the point that makes the highest angle with the previous line (have a look at graham scan to see what I mean (*), chose the one with the highest angle that was part of one of the previous polygon.
You will get an envellope (not convex) that will describe your shape.
Note:
It's similar to finding the convex hull of your points.
For example graham scan algorithm will help you find the convex hull of the set of points in O (N*ln (N) where N is the number of points.
Look up for convex hull algorithms, and you can find some ideas.
Remarques:
(*)From wikipedia:
The first step in this algorithm is to find the point with the lowest
y-coordinate. If the lowest y-coordinate exists in more than one point
in the set, the point with the lowest x-coordinate out of the
candidates should be chosen. Call this point P. This step takes O(n),
where n is the number of points in question.
Next, the set of points must be sorted in increasing order of the
angle they and the point P make with the x-axis. Any general-purpose
sorting algorithm is appropriate for this, for example heapsort (which
is O(n log n)). In order to speed up the calculations, it is not
necessary to calculate the actual angle these points make with the
x-axis; instead, it suffices to calculate the cosine of this angle: it
is a monotonically decreasing function in the domain in question
(which is 0 to 180 degrees, due to the first step) and may be
calculated with simple arithmetic.
In the convex hull algorithm you chose the point of the angle that makes the largest angle with the previous side.
To "stick" with your previous polygon, just add the constraint that you must select a side that previously existed.
And you take off the constraint of having angle less than 180°
I don't have a full answer but I'm about to embark on a similar problem. I think there are two step which are fairly important. First would be to find a point on some polygon which lies on the outside edge. Second would be to make a list of bounding boxes for all the vertices and see which of these overlap. This means when you iterate through vertices, you don't have to do tests for all of them, only those which you know have a chance of intersecting (bounding box problems are lightweight).
Since you now have an outside point, you can now iterate through connected points until you detect an intersection. If you know which side is inside and which outside (you may need to do some work on the first vertex to know this), you know which way to go on the intersection. Then it's merely a matter of switching polygons.
This gets a little more interesting if you want to maintain that hole (which I do) in which case, I would probably make sure I had used up all my intersecting bounding boxes. You also didn't specify what should happen if your polygons don't intersect at all. But that's either going to be leave them alone (which could potentially be a problem if you're expecting one polygon out) or return an error.