Related
We are given n points in a 3d space ,we need to find count of all points that are strictly less than atleast one of the points in the 3d space
i.e.
x1<x2 and y1<y2 and z1<z2
so (x1,y1,z1) would be one such point.
For example,Given points
1 4 2
4 3 2
2 5 3
(1,4,2)<(2,5,3)
So the answer for the above case should be the count of such points i.e. 1.
I know this can be solved through a O(n^2) algorithm but i need something faster,i tried sorting through one dimension and then searching only over the greater part of the key , but its still o(n^2) worst case.
What is the efficient way to do this?
There is a way to optimize your search that may be faster than O(n^2) - I would welcome counter-sample input.
Keep three lists of the indexes of the points, sorted by x, y and z respectively. Make a fourth list associating each point with it's place in each of the lists (indexes in the code below; e. g., indexes[0] = [5,124,789] would mean the first point is 5th in the x-sorted list, 124th in the y-sorted list, and 789th in the z-sorted list).
Now iterate over the points - pick the list where the point is highest and test the point against the higher indexed points in the list, exiting early if the point is strictly less than one of them. If a point is low on all three lists, the likelihood of finding a strictly higher point is greater. Otherwise, a higher place in one of the lists means less iterations.
JavaScript code:
function strictlyLessThan(p1,p2){
return p1[0] < p2[0] && p1[1] < p2[1] && p1[2] < p2[2];
}
// iterations
var it = 0;
function f(ps){
var res = 0,
indexes = new Array(ps.length);
// sort by x
var sortedX =
ps.map(function(x,i){ return i; })
.sort(function(a,b){ return ps[a][0] - ps[b][0]; });
// record index of point in x-sorted list
for (var i=0; i<sortedX.length; i++){
indexes[sortedX[i]] = [i,null,null];
}
// sort by y
var sortedY =
ps.map(function(x,i){ return i; })
.sort(function(a,b){ return ps[a][1] - ps[b][1]; });
// record index of point in y-sorted list
for (var i=0; i<sortedY.length; i++){
indexes[sortedY[i]][1] = i;
}
// sort by z
var sortedZ =
ps.map(function(x,i){ return i; })
.sort(function(a,b){ return ps[a][2] - ps[b][2]; });
// record index of point in z-sorted list
for (var i=0; i<sortedZ.length; i++){
indexes[sortedZ[i]][2] = i;
}
// check for possible greater points only in the list
// where the point is highest
for (var i=0; i<ps.length; i++){
var listToCheck,
startIndex;
if (indexes[i][0] > indexes[i][1]){
if (indexes[i][0] > indexes[i][2]){
listToCheck = sortedX;
startIndex = indexes[i][0];
} else {
listToCheck = sortedZ;
startIndex = indexes[i][2];
}
} else {
if (indexes[i][1] > indexes[i][2]){
listToCheck = sortedY;
startIndex = indexes[i][1];
} else {
listToCheck = sortedZ;
startIndex = indexes[i][2];
}
}
var j = startIndex + 1;
while (listToCheck[j] !== undefined){
it++;
var point = ps[listToCheck[j]];
if (strictlyLessThan(ps[i],point)){
res++;
break;
}
j++;
}
}
return res;
}
// var input = [[5,0,0],[4,1,0],[3,2,0],[2,3,0],[1,4,0],[0,5,0],[4,0,1],[3,1,1], [2,2,1],[1,3,1],[0,4,1],[3,0,2],[2,1,2],[1,2,2],[0,3,2],[2,0,3], [1,1,3],[0,2,3],[1,0,4],[0,1,4],[0,0,5]];
var input = new Array(10000);
for (var i=0; i<input.length; i++){
input[i] = [Math.random(),Math.random(),Math.random()];
}
console.log(input.length + ' points');
console.log('result: ' + f(input));
console.log(it + ' iterations not including sorts');
I doubt that the worst-case complexity can be reduced below N×N, because it is possible to create input where no point is strictly less than any other point:
For any value n, consider the plane that intersects with the Z, Y and Z axis at (n,0,0), (0,n,0) and (0,0,n), described by the equation x+y+z=n. If the input consists of points on such a plane, none of the points is strictly less than any other point.
Example of worst-case input:
(5,0,0) (4,1,0) (3,2,0) (2,3,0) (1,4,0) (0,5,0)
(4,0,1) (3,1,1) (2,2,1) (1,3,1) (0,4,1)
(3,0,2) (2,1,2) (1,2,2) (0,3,2)
(2,0,3) (1,1,3) (0,2,3)
(1,0,4) (0,1,4)
(0,0,5)
However, the average complexity can be reduced to much less than N×N, e.g. with this approach:
Take the first point from the input and put it in a list.
Take the second point from the input, and compare it to the first
point in the list. If it is strictly less, discard the new point. If
it is strictly greater, replace the point in the list with the new
point. If it is neither, add the point to the list.
For each new point from the input, compare it to each point in the
list. If it is stricly less than any point in the list, discard the
new point. If it is strictly greater, replace the point in the list
with the new point, and also discard any further points in the list
which are strictly less than the new point. If the new point is not
strictly less or greater than any point in the list, add the new
point to the list.
After checking every point in the input, the result is the number of
points in the input minus the number of points in the list.
Since the probability that for any two random points a and b either a<b or b<a is 25%, the list won't grow to be very large (unless the input is specifically crafted to contain few or no points that are strictly less than any other point).
Limited testing with the code below (100 cases) with 1,000,000 randomly distributed points in a cubic space shows that the average list size is around 116 (with a maximum of 160), and the number of checks whether a point is strictly less than another point is around 1,333,000 (with a maximum of 2,150,000).
(And a few tests with 10,000,000 points show that the average number of checks is around 11,000,000 with a list size around 150.)
So in practice, the average complexity is close to N rather than N×N.
function xyzLessCount(input) {
var list = [input[0]]; // put first point in list
for (var i = 1; i < input.length; i++) { // check every point in input
var append = true;
for (var j = 0; j < list.length; j++) { // against every point in list
if (xyzLess(input[i], list[j])) { // new point < list point
append = false;
break; // continue with next point
}
if (xyzLess(list[j], input[i])) { // new point > list point
list[j] = input[i]; // replace list point
for (var k = list.length - 1; k > j; k--) {
if (xyzLess(list[k], list[j])) { // check rest of list
list.splice(k, 1); // remove list point
}
}
append = false;
break; // continue with next point
}
}
if (append) list.push(input[i]); // append new point to list
}
return input.length - list.length;
function xyzLess(a, b) {
return a.x < b.x && a.y < b.y && a.z < b.z;
}
}
var points = []; // random test data
for (var i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) {
points.push({x: Math.random(), y: Math.random(), z: Math.random()});
}
document.write("1000000 → " + xyzLessCount(points));
This is not a homework question :)
I have a set of rectangles scattered across an image. I want to merge (create a union) of every group of intersected rectangles. If a rectangle doesn't intersect its neighbors, it remains untouched.
The problem is that merged rectangles can intersect rectangles that were previously not in consideration; merged rectangles can also intersect newly-merged rectangles. I want to catch those cases.
So, in my mind, it needs to be iterative (try each rect against every other rect in the set) and recursive (try each merged rect against the set again, including merged rects).
How can I go about this? I'm working in Java, but this is more of an algorithmic question than a language-oriented one.
Thanks!
Edit: added relevant code to better illustrate the poor way in which I'm handling it now.
public static List<BinaryRegion> mergeRegions(List<BinaryRegion> regions)
{
List<BinaryRegion> merged = new ArrayList<BinaryRegion>();
geoModel = new GeometryFactory();
Polygon polys[] = new Polygon[regions.size()];
for (int i = 0; i < regions.size(); i++)
{
Polygon p = convertRectangleToPolygon(regions.get(i)
.getBoundingBox());
polys[i] = p;
}
System.out.println("Converted " + regions.size() + " polys");
for (int i = 0; i < regions.size(); i++)
{
System.out.println("Sending in poly " + i);
ArrayList<Polygon> result = mergePoly(polys[i], polys);
System.out.println("After run, size=" + result.size());
}
return merged;
}
private static ArrayList<Polygon> mergePoly(Polygon p, Polygon[] polys)
{
ArrayList<Polygon> merges = new ArrayList<Polygon>();
for (int i = 0; i < polys.length; i++)
{
if (p.equals(polys[i]))
System.out.println("found the exact match at " + i);
else if (p.intersects(polys[i]))
{
System.out.println("Found intersection at " + i);
System.out.println("Other poly is area "+polys[i].getArea());
Polygon u = (Polygon) p.union(polys[i]);
System.out.println("Merge size="+u.getArea());
merges.add(u);
}
else
merges.add(polys[i]);
}
return merges;
}
Not entirely sure whether this nested iterative approach is really the way to go (especially since I don't see how exactly you're handling the merged regions after your call to mergePoly). Instead of working with one polygon at a time comparing to all other polygons, why don't you keep intermediate steps and rerun the merge until there are no more intersections? Something along the lines of:
private static ArrayList<Polygon> mergePoly(Polygon[] polys)
{
List<Polygon> polygons = new ArrayList<Polygon>(Arrays.asList(polys));
boolean foundIntersection = false;
do
{
foundIntersection = false;
for (int i = 0; i < polygons.size(); i++)
{
Polygon current = polygons.get(i);
for (int j = i + 1; j < polygons.size(); j++)
{
if (current.intersects(polygons.get(j)))
{
foundIntersection = true;
current = (Polygon)current.union(polygons.remove(j--));
System.out.println("Merge size="+u.getArea());
}
}
polygons.set(i, current);
}
} while(foundIntersection);
return polygons;
}
It's been a while since I've worked with Java, but the logic is pretty self-explanatory. You perform two iterations of the polygons. The outside iteration is your "current" polygon, that you will merge all the inner polygons with (removing them from the collection as you go along). After every outer iteration, you'll just set the element at that index with the (possibly) merged polygon, and move on to the next polygon in the series. You'll keep doing this until you no longer get anymore merges. Just keep in mind that this is a horribly naive implementation, and you might be better off breaking it off into "halves" and merging these smaller subsets (think of mergesort).
You can use the sweep line algorithm to find the intersections of rectangles (example1, example2) and the union-find algorithm to effectively merge sets of rectangles.
This is a question regarding forming a topographical tree in 3D. A bit of context: I have a physics engine where I have bodies and collision points and some constraints. This is not homework, but an experiment in a multi-threading.
I need to sort the bodies in a bottom-to-top fashion with groups of objects belonging to layers like in this document: See section on "shock-propagation"
http://www2.imm.dtu.dk/visiondag/VD05/graphical/slides/kenny.pdf
the pseudocode he uses to describe how to iterate over the tree makes perfect sense:
shock-propagation(algorithm A)
compute contact graph
for each stack layer in bottom up order
fixate bottom-most objects of layer
apply algorithm A to layer
un-fixate bottom-most objects of layer
next layer
I already have algorithm A figured out (my impulse code). What would the pseudocode look like for tree/layer sorting (topo sort?) with a list of 3D points?
I.E., I don't know where to stop/begin the next "rung" or "branch". I guess I could just chunk it up by y position, but that seems clunky and error prone. Do I look into topographical sorting? I don't really know how to go about this in 3D. How would I get "edges" for a topo sort, if that's the way to do it?
Am I over thinking this and I just "connect the dots" by finding point p1 then the least distant next point p2 where p2.y > p1.y ? I see a problem here where p1 distance from p0 could be greater than p2 using pure distances, which would lead to a bad sort.
i just tackled this myself.
I found an example of how to accomplish this in the downloadable source code linked to this paper:
http://www-cs-students.stanford.edu/~eparker/files/PhysicsEngine/
Specifically the WorldState.cs file starting at line 221.
But the idea being that you assign all static objects with the level of -1 and each other object with a different default level of say -2. Then for each collision with the bodies at level -1 you add the body it collided with to a list and set its level to 0.
After that using a while loop while(list.Count > 0) check for the bodies that collide with it and set there levels to the body.level + 1.
After that, for each body in the simulation that still has the default level (i said -2 earlier) set its level to the highest level.
There are a few more fine details, but looking at the code in the example will explain it way better than i ever could.
Hope it helps!
Relevant Code from Evan Parker's code. [Stanford]
{{{
// topological sort (bfs)
// TODO check this
int max_level = -1;
while (queue.Count > 0)
{
RigidBody a = queue.Dequeue() as RigidBody;
//Console.Out.WriteLine("considering collisions with '{0}'", a.Name);
if (a.level > max_level) max_level = a.level;
foreach (CollisionPair cp in a.collisions)
{
RigidBody b = (cp.body[0] == a ? cp.body[1] : cp.body[0]);
//Console.Out.WriteLine("considering collision between '{0}' and '{1}'", a.Name, b.Name);
if (!b.levelSet)
{
b.level = a.level + 1;
b.levelSet = true;
queue.Enqueue(b);
//Console.Out.WriteLine("found body '{0}' in level {1}", b.Name, b.level);
}
}
}
int num_levels = max_level + 1;
//Console.WriteLine("num_levels = {0}", num_levels);
ArrayList[] bodiesAtLevel = new ArrayList[num_levels];
ArrayList[] collisionsAtLevel = new ArrayList[num_levels];
for (int i = 0; i < num_levels; i++)
{
bodiesAtLevel[i] = new ArrayList();
collisionsAtLevel[i] = new ArrayList();
}
for (int i = 0; i < bodies.GetNumBodies(); i++)
{
RigidBody a = bodies.GetBody(i);
if (!a.levelSet || a.level < 0) continue; // either a static body or no contacts
// add a to a's level
bodiesAtLevel[a.level].Add(a);
// add collisions involving a to a's level
foreach (CollisionPair cp in a.collisions)
{
RigidBody b = (cp.body[0] == a ? cp.body[1] : cp.body[0]);
if (b.level <= a.level) // contact with object at or below the same level as a
{
// make sure not to add duplicate collisions
bool found = false;
foreach (CollisionPair cp2 in collisionsAtLevel[a.level])
if (cp == cp2) found = true;
if (!found) collisionsAtLevel[a.level].Add(cp);
}
}
}
for (int step = 0; step < num_contact_steps; step++)
{
for (int level = 0; level < num_levels; level++)
{
// process all contacts
foreach (CollisionPair cp in collisionsAtLevel[level])
{
cp.ResolveContact(dt, (num_contact_steps - step - 1) * -1.0f/num_contact_steps);
}
}
}
}}}
I need do find a cycle beginning and ending at given point. It is not guaranteed that it exists.
I use bool[,] points to indicate which point can be in cycle. Poins can be only on grid. points indicates if given point on grid can be in cycle.
I need to find this cycle using as minimum number of points.
One point can be used only once.
Connection can be only vertical or horizontal.
Let this be our points (red is starting point):
removing dead ImageShack links
I realized that I can do this:
while(numberOfPointsChanged)
{
//remove points that are alone in row or column
}
So i have:
removing dead ImageShack links
Now, I can find the path.
removing dead ImageShack links
But what if there are points that are not deleted by this loop but should not be in path?
I have written code:
class MyPoint
{
public int X { get; set; }
public int Y { get; set; }
public List<MyPoint> Neighbours = new List<MyPoint>();
public MyPoint parent = null;
public bool marked = false;
}
private static MyPoint LoopSearch2(bool[,] mask, int supIndexStart, int recIndexStart)
{
List<MyPoint> points = new List<MyPoint>();
//here begins translation bool[,] to list of points
points.Add(new MyPoint { X = recIndexStart, Y = supIndexStart });
for (int i = 0; i < mask.GetLength(0); i++)
{
for (int j = 0; j < mask.GetLength(1); j++)
{
if (mask[i, j])
{
points.Add(new MyPoint { X = j, Y = i });
}
}
}
for (int i = 0; i < points.Count; i++)
{
for (int j = 0; j < points.Count; j++)
{
if (i != j)
{
if (points[i].X == points[j].X || points[i].Y == points[j].Y)
{
points[i].Neighbours.Add(points[j]);
}
}
}
}
//end of translating
List<MyPoint> queue = new List<MyPoint>();
MyPoint start = (points[0]); //beginning point
start.marked = true; //it is marked
MyPoint last=null; //last point. this will be returned
queue.Add(points[0]);
while(queue.Count>0)
{
MyPoint current = queue.First(); //taking point from queue
queue.Remove(current); //removing it
foreach(MyPoint neighbour in current.Neighbours) //checking Neighbours
{
if (!neighbour.marked) //in neighbour isn't marked adding it to queue
{
neighbour.marked = true;
neighbour.parent = current;
queue.Add(neighbour);
}
//if neighbour is marked checking if it is startig point and if neighbour's parent is current point. if it is not that means that loop already got here so we start searching parents to got to starting point
else if(!neighbour.Equals(start) && !neighbour.parent.Equals(current))
{
current = neighbour;
while(true)
{
if (current.parent.Equals(start))
{
last = current;
break;
}
else
current = current.parent;
}
break;
}
}
}
return last;
}
But it doesn't work. The path it founds contains two points: start and it's first neighbour.
What am I doing wrong?
EDIT:
Forgot to mention... After horizontal connection there has to be vertical, horizontal, vertical and so on...
What is more in each row and column there need to be max two points (two or none) that are in the cycle. But this condition is the same as "The cycle has to be the shortest one".
First of all, you should change your representation to a more efficient one. You should make vertex a structure/class, which keeps the list of the connected vertices.
Having changed the representation, you can easily find the shortest cycle using breadth-first search.
You can speed the search up with the following trick: traverse the graph in the breadth-first order, marking the traversed vertices (and storing the "parent vertex" number on the way to the root at each vertex). AS soon as you find an already marked vertex, the search is finished. You can find the two paths from the found vertex to the root by walking back by the stored "parent" vertices.
Edit:
Are you sure you code is right? I tried the following:
while (queue.Count > 0)
{
MyPoint current = queue.First(); //taking point from queue
queue.Remove(current); //removing it
foreach (MyPoint neighbour in current.Neighbours) //checking Neighbours
{
if (!neighbour.marked) //if neighbour isn't marked adding it to queue
{
neighbour.marked = true;
neighbour.parent = current;
queue.Add(neighbour);
}
else if (!neighbour.Equals(current.parent)) // not considering own parent
{
// found!
List<MyPoint> loop = new List<MyPoint>();
MyPoint p = current;
do
{
loop.Add(p);
p = p.parent;
}
while (p != null);
p = neighbour;
while (!p.Equals(start))
{
loop.Add(p);
p = p.parent;
}
return loop;
}
}
}
return null;
instead of the corresponding part in your code (I changed the return type to List<MyPoint>, too). It works and correctly finds a smaller loop, consisting of 3 points: the red point, the point directly above and the point directly below.
That is what I have done. I don't know if it is optimised but it does work correctly. I have not done the sorting of the points as #marcog suggested.
private static bool LoopSearch2(bool[,] mask, int supIndexStart, int recIndexStart, out List<MyPoint> path)
{
List<MyPoint> points = new List<MyPoint>();
points.Add(new MyPoint { X = recIndexStart, Y = supIndexStart });
for (int i = 0; i < mask.GetLength(0); i++)
{
for (int j = 0; j < mask.GetLength(1); j++)
{
if (mask[i, j])
{
points.Add(new MyPoint { X = j, Y = i });
}
}
}
for (int i = 0; i < points.Count; i++)
{
for (int j = 0; j < points.Count; j++)
{
if (i != j)
{
if (points[i].X == points[j].X || points[i].Y == points[j].Y)
{
points[i].Neighbours.Add(points[j]);
}
}
}
}
List<MyPoint> queue = new List<MyPoint>();
MyPoint start = (points[0]);
start.marked = true;
queue.Add(points[0]);
path = new List<MyPoint>();
bool found = false;
while(queue.Count>0)
{
MyPoint current = queue.First();
queue.Remove(current);
foreach (MyPoint neighbour in current.Neighbours)
{
if (!neighbour.marked)
{
neighbour.marked = true;
neighbour.parent = current;
queue.Add(neighbour);
}
else
{
if (neighbour.parent != null && neighbour.parent.Equals(current))
continue;
if (current.parent == null)
continue;
bool previousConnectionHorizontal = current.parent.Y == current.Y;
bool currentConnectionHorizontal = current.Y == neighbour.Y;
if (previousConnectionHorizontal != currentConnectionHorizontal)
{
MyPoint prev = current;
while (true)
{
path.Add(prev);
if (prev.Equals(start))
break;
prev = prev.parent;
}
path.Reverse();
prev = neighbour;
while (true)
{
if (prev.Equals(start))
break;
path.Add(prev);
prev = prev.parent;
}
found = true;
break;
}
}
if (found) break;
}
if (found) break;
}
if (path.Count == 0)
{
path = null;
return false;
}
return true;
}
Your points removal step is worst case O(N^3) if implemented poorly, with the worst case being stripping a single point in each iteration. And since it doesn't always save you that much computation in the cycle detection, I'd avoid doing it as it also adds an extra layer of complexity to the solution.
Begin by creating an adjacency list from the set of points. You can do this efficiently in O(NlogN) if you sort the points by X and Y (separately) and iterate through the points in order of X and Y. Then to find the shortest cycle length (determined by number of points), start a BFS from each point by initially throwing all points on the queue. As you traverse an edge, store the source of the path along with the current point. Then you will know when the BFS returns to the source, in which case we've found a cycle. If you end up with an empty queue before finding a cycle, then none exists. Be careful not to track back immediately to the previous point or you will end up with a defunct cycle formed by two points. You might also want to avoid, for example, a cycle formed by the points (0, 0), (0, 2) and (0, 1) as this forms a straight line.
The BFS potentially has a worst case of being exponential, but I believe such a case can either be proven to not exist or be extremely rare as the denser the graph the quicker you'll find a cycle while the sparser the graph the smaller your queue will be. On average it is more likely to be closer to the same runtime as the adjacency list construction, or in the worst realistic cases O(N^2).
I think that I'd use an adapted variant of Dijkstra's algorithm which stops and returns the cycle whenever it arrives to any node for the second time. If this never happens, you don't have a cycle.
This approach should be much more efficient than a breadth-first or depth-first search, especially if you have many nodes. It is guarateed that you'll only visit each node once, thereby you have a linear runtime.
I would like to determine a polygon and implement an algorithm which would check if a point is inside or outside the polygon.
Does anyone know if there is any example available of any similar algorithm?
If i remember correctly, the algorithm is to draw a horizontal line through your test point. Count how many lines of of the polygon you intersect to reach your point.
If the answer is odd, you're inside. If the answer is even, you're outside.
Edit: Yeah, what he said (Wikipedia):
C# code
bool IsPointInPolygon(List<Loc> poly, Loc point)
{
int i, j;
bool c = false;
for (i = 0, j = poly.Count - 1; i < poly.Count; j = i++)
{
if ((((poly[i].Lt <= point.Lt) && (point.Lt < poly[j].Lt))
|| ((poly[j].Lt <= point.Lt) && (point.Lt < poly[i].Lt)))
&& (point.Lg < (poly[j].Lg - poly[i].Lg) * (point.Lt - poly[i].Lt)
/ (poly[j].Lt - poly[i].Lt) + poly[i].Lg))
{
c = !c;
}
}
return c;
}
Location class
public class Loc
{
private double lt;
private double lg;
public double Lg
{
get { return lg; }
set { lg = value; }
}
public double Lt
{
get { return lt; }
set { lt = value; }
}
public Loc(double lt, double lg)
{
this.lt = lt;
this.lg = lg;
}
}
After searching the web and trying various implementations and porting them from C++ to C# I finally got my code straight:
public static bool PointInPolygon(LatLong p, List<LatLong> poly)
{
int n = poly.Count();
poly.Add(new LatLong { Lat = poly[0].Lat, Lon = poly[0].Lon });
LatLong[] v = poly.ToArray();
int wn = 0; // the winding number counter
// loop through all edges of the polygon
for (int i = 0; i < n; i++)
{ // edge from V[i] to V[i+1]
if (v[i].Lat <= p.Lat)
{ // start y <= P.y
if (v[i + 1].Lat > p.Lat) // an upward crossing
if (isLeft(v[i], v[i + 1], p) > 0) // P left of edge
++wn; // have a valid up intersect
}
else
{ // start y > P.y (no test needed)
if (v[i + 1].Lat <= p.Lat) // a downward crossing
if (isLeft(v[i], v[i + 1], p) < 0) // P right of edge
--wn; // have a valid down intersect
}
}
if (wn != 0)
return true;
else
return false;
}
private static int isLeft(LatLong P0, LatLong P1, LatLong P2)
{
double calc = ((P1.Lon - P0.Lon) * (P2.Lat - P0.Lat)
- (P2.Lon - P0.Lon) * (P1.Lat - P0.Lat));
if (calc > 0)
return 1;
else if (calc < 0)
return -1;
else
return 0;
}
The isLeft function was giving me rounding problems and I spent hours without realizing that I was doing the conversion wrong, so forgive me for the lame if block at the end of that function.
BTW, this is the original code and article:
http://softsurfer.com/Archive/algorithm_0103/algorithm_0103.htm
By far the best explanation and implementation can be found at
Point In Polygon Winding Number Inclusion
There is even a C++ implementation at the end of the well explained article. This site also contains some great algorithms/solutions for other geometry based problems.
I have modified and used the C++ implementation and also created a C# implementation. You definitely want to use the Winding Number algorithm as it is more accurate than the edge crossing algorithm and it is very fast.
I think there is a simpler and more efficient solution.
Here is the code in C++. I should be simple to convert it to C#.
int pnpoly(int npol, float *xp, float *yp, float x, float y)
{
int i, j, c = 0;
for (i = 0, j = npol-1; i < npol; j = i++) {
if ((((yp[i] <= y) && (y < yp[j])) ||
((yp[j] <= y) && (y < yp[i]))) &&
(x < (xp[j] - xp[i]) * (y - yp[i]) / (yp[j] - yp[i]) + xp[i]))
c = !c;
}
return c;
}
The complete solution in asp.Net C#, you can see the complete detail here, you can see how to find point(lat,lon) whether its inside or Outside the Polygon using the latitude and longitudes ?
Article Reference Link
private static bool checkPointExistsInGeofencePolygon(string latlnglist, string lat, string lng)
{
List<Loc> objList = new List<Loc>();
// sample string should be like this strlatlng = "39.11495,-76.873259|39.114588,-76.872808|39.112921,-76.870373|";
string[] arr = latlnglist.Split('|');
for (int i = 0; i <= arr.Length - 1; i++)
{
string latlng = arr[i];
string[] arrlatlng = latlng.Split(',');
Loc er = new Loc(Convert.ToDouble(arrlatlng[0]), Convert.ToDouble(arrlatlng[1]));
objList.Add(er);
}
Loc pt = new Loc(Convert.ToDouble(lat), Convert.ToDouble(lng));
if (IsPointInPolygon(objList, pt) == true)
{
return true;
}
else
{
return false;
}
}
private static bool IsPointInPolygon(List<Loc> poly, Loc point)
{
int i, j;
bool c = false;
for (i = 0, j = poly.Count - 1; i < poly.Count; j = i++)
{
if ((((poly[i].Lt <= point.Lt) && (point.Lt < poly[j].Lt)) |
((poly[j].Lt <= point.Lt) && (point.Lt < poly[i].Lt))) &&
(point.Lg < (poly[j].Lg - poly[i].Lg) * (point.Lt - poly[i].Lt) / (poly[j].Lt - poly[i].Lt) + poly[i].Lg))
c = !c;
}
return c;
}
Just a heads up (using answer as I can't comment), if you want to use point-in-polygon for geo fencing, then you need to change your algorithm to work with spherical coordinates. -180 longitude is the same as 180 longitude and point-in-polygon will break in such situation.
Relating to kobers answer I worked it out with more readable clean code and changed the longitudes that crosses the date border:
public bool IsPointInPolygon(List<PointPosition> polygon, double latitude, double longitude)
{
bool isInIntersection = false;
int actualPointIndex = 0;
int pointIndexBeforeActual = polygon.Count - 1;
var offset = calculateLonOffsetFromDateLine(polygon);
longitude = longitude < 0.0 ? longitude + offset : longitude;
foreach (var actualPointPosition in polygon)
{
var p1Lat = actualPointPosition.Latitude;
var p1Lon = actualPointPosition.Longitude;
var p0Lat = polygon[pointIndexBeforeActual].Latitude;
var p0Lon = polygon[pointIndexBeforeActual].Longitude;
if (p1Lon < 0.0) p1Lon += offset;
if (p0Lon < 0.0) p0Lon += offset;
// Jordan curve theorem - odd even rule algorithm
if (isPointLatitudeBetweenPolyLine(p0Lat, p1Lat, latitude)
&& isPointRightFromPolyLine(p0Lat, p0Lon, p1Lat, p1Lon, latitude, longitude))
{
isInIntersection = !isInIntersection;
}
pointIndexBeforeActual = actualPointIndex;
actualPointIndex++;
}
return isInIntersection;
}
private double calculateLonOffsetFromDateLine(List<PointPosition> polygon)
{
double offset = 0.0;
var maxLonPoly = polygon.Max(x => x.Longitude);
var minLonPoly = polygon.Min(x => x.Longitude);
if (Math.Abs(minLonPoly - maxLonPoly) > 180)
{
offset = 360.0;
}
return offset;
}
private bool isPointLatitudeBetweenPolyLine(double polyLinePoint1Lat, double polyLinePoint2Lat, double poiLat)
{
return polyLinePoint2Lat <= poiLat && poiLat < polyLinePoint1Lat || polyLinePoint1Lat <= poiLat && poiLat < polyLinePoint2Lat;
}
private bool isPointRightFromPolyLine(double polyLinePoint1Lat, double polyLinePoint1Lon, double polyLinePoint2Lat, double polyLinePoint2Lon, double poiLat, double poiLon)
{
// lon <(lon1-lon2)*(latp-lat2)/(lat1-lat2)+lon2
return poiLon < (polyLinePoint1Lon - polyLinePoint2Lon) * (poiLat - polyLinePoint2Lat) / (polyLinePoint1Lat - polyLinePoint2Lat) + polyLinePoint2Lon;
}
I add one detail to help people who live in the... south of earth!!
If you're in Brazil (that's my case), our GPS coord are all negatives.
And all these algo give wrong results.
The easiest way if to use the absolute values of the Lat and Long of all point. And in that case Jan Kobersky's algo is perfect.
Check if a point is inside a polygon or not -
Consider the polygon which has vertices a1,a2,a3,a4,a5. The following set of steps should help in ascertaining whether point P lies inside the polygon or outside.
Compute the vector area of the triangle formed by edge a1->a2 and the vectors connecting a2 to P and P to a1. Similarly, compute the vector area of the each of the possible triangles having one side as the side of the polygon and the other two connecting P to that side.
For a point to be inside a polygon, each of the triangles need to have positive area. Even if one of the triangles have a negative area then the point P stands out of the polygon.
In order to compute the area of a triangle given vectors representing its 3 edges, refer to http://www.jtaylor1142001.net/calcjat/Solutions/VCrossProduct/VCPATriangle.htm
The problem is easier if your polygon is convex. If so, you can do a simple test for each line to see if the point is on the inside or outside of that line (extending to infinity in both directions). Otherwise, for concave polygons, draw an imaginary ray from your point out to infinity (in any direction). Count how many times it crosses a boundary line. Odd means the point is inside, even means the point is outside.
This last algorithm is trickier than it looks. You will have to be very careful about what happens when your imaginary ray exactly hits one of the polygon's vertices.
If your imaginary ray goes in the -x direction, you can choose only to count lines that include at least one point whose y coordinate is strictly less than the y coordinate of your point. This is how you get most of the weird edge cases to work correctly.
If you have a simple polygon (none of the lines cross) and you don't have holes you can also triangulate the polygon, which you are probably going to do anyway in a GIS app to draw a TIN, then test for points in each triangle. If you have a small number of edges to the polygon but a large number of points this is fast.
For an interesting point in triangle see link text
Otherwise definately use the winding rule rather than edge crossing, edge crossing has real problems with points on edges, which if your data is generated form a GPS with limited precision is very likely.
the polygon is defined as a sequential list of point pairs A, B, C .... A.
no side A-B, B-C ... crosses any other side
Determine box Xmin, Xmax, Ymin, Ymax
case 1 the test point P lies outside the box
case 2 the test point P lies inside the box:
Determine the 'diameter' D of the box {[Xmin,Ymin] - [Xmax, Ymax]} ( and add a little extra to avoid possible confusion with D being on a side)
Determine the gradients M of all sides
Find a gradient Mt most different from all gradients M
The test line runs from P at gradient Mt a distance D.
Set the count of intersections to zero
For each of the sides A-B, B-C test for the intersection of P-D with a side
from its start up to but NOT INCLUDING its end. Increment the count of intersections
if required. Note that a zero distance from P to the intersection indicates that P is ON a side
An odd count indicates P is inside the polygon
I translated c# method in Php and I added many comments to understand code.Description of PolygonHelps:
Check if a point is inside or outside of a polygon. This procedure uses gps coordinates and it works when polygon has a little geographic area.
INPUT:$poly: array of Point: polygon vertices list; [{Point}, {Point}, ...];$point: point to check; Point: {"lat" => "x.xxx", "lng" => "y.yyy"}
When $c is false, the number of intersections with polygon is even, so the point is outside of polygon;When $c is true, the number of intersections with polygon is odd, so the point is inside of polygon;$n is the number of vertices in polygon;For each vertex in polygon, method calculates line through current vertex and previous vertex and check if the two lines have an intersection point.$c changes when intersection point exists.
So, method can return true if point is inside the polygon, else return false.
class PolygonHelps {
public static function isPointInPolygon(&$poly, $point){
$c = false;
$n = $j = count($poly);
for ($i = 0, $j = $n - 1; $i < $n; $j = $i++){
if ( ( ( ( $poly[$i]->lat <= $point->lat ) && ( $point->lat < $poly[$j]->lat ) )
|| ( ( $poly[$j]->lat <= $point->lat ) && ( $point->lat < $poly[$i]->lat ) ) )
&& ( $point->lng < ( $poly[$j]->lng - $poly[$i]->lng )
* ( $point->lat - $poly[$i]->lat )
/ ( $poly[$j]->lat - $poly[$i]->lat )
+ $poly[$i]->lng ) ){
$c = !$c;
}
}
return $c;
}
}
Jan's answer is great.
Here is the same code using the GeoCoordinate class instead.
using System.Device.Location;
...
public static bool IsPointInPolygon(List<GeoCoordinate> poly, GeoCoordinate point)
{
int i, j;
bool c = false;
for (i = 0, j = poly.Count - 1; i < poly.Count; j = i++)
{
if ((((poly[i].Latitude <= point.Latitude) && (point.Latitude < poly[j].Latitude))
|| ((poly[j].Latitude <= point.Latitude) && (point.Latitude < poly[i].Latitude)))
&& (point.Longitude < (poly[j].Longitude - poly[i].Longitude) * (point.Latitude - poly[i].Latitude)
/ (poly[j].Latitude - poly[i].Latitude) + poly[i].Longitude))
c = !c;
}
return c;
}
You can try this simple class https://github.com/xopbatgh/sb-polygon-pointer
It is easy to deal with it
You just insert polygon coordinates into array
Ask library is desired point with lat/lng inside the polygon
$polygonBox = [
[55.761515, 37.600375],
[55.759428, 37.651156],
[55.737112, 37.649566],
[55.737649, 37.597301],
];
$sbPolygonEngine = new sbPolygonEngine($polygonBox);
$isCrosses = $sbPolygonEngine->isCrossesWith(55.746768, 37.625605);
// $isCrosses is boolean
(answer was returned from deleted by myself because initially it was formatted wrong)