Generally we traverse the array by row or column but here I want to traverse it in an angle.
I will try and explain what I mean,
So lets say if the angle is 45 degree then rather than row by col it would search as (0,0) then (0,1) (1,0) then (0,2) , (1,1) ,(2,0) and so on.. .(sorry could not upload an image as I am new user and not allowed to do so, may be try and imagine/draw an array that would help get what I am trying to say)
But what will happen if the user inputs an angle like 20 degree how can we determine how to search the array.
i just wanted to know if there is any algorithm which does something similar to this? Programming language is not an issue i guess the issue is more of algoritham sort.
Any ideas would be welcome.
Please feel free to ask if I am not able to explain clearly what I am looking for.
Thanks guys.
Easy. Take an angle (let's say 45). This corresponds to a vector v=(1, 1) in your case. (This can be normalized to a unitary vector (sqrt(2)/2, sqrt(2)/2), but this is not necessary)
For every single point in your array, you have their coordinates (x, y). Simply do the scalar product of these coordinates with the vector. Let's call f(x, y) = scalarProduct((x, y), v)
Sort the values of f(x, y) and you've got the "traversing" you're looking for!
A real example.
Your matrix is 3x3
The scalar products are :
(0,0).(1,1) = 0
(0,1).(1,1) = 1
(0,2).(1,1) = 2
(1,0).(1,1) = 1
(1,1).(1,1) = 2
(1,2).(1,1) = 3
(2,0).(1,1) = 2
(2,1).(1,1) = 3
(2,2).(1,1) = 4
If you order these scalar products by ascending order, you obtain the ordering (0,0), (1,0), (1,0), (2,0), (1,1), (0,2), (2,1)...
And if you want to do it with the angle 20, replace all occurences of v=(1, 1) with v=(cos(20), sin(20))
Here's an illustration of a geometrical interpretation. The scalar products correspond to the intersections of the vector v (in red) with the blue lines.
For every starting point (the leftmost point of every row), use trigonometry to determine an ending point for the given angle. The tan(angle) is defined as (height difference / width of the array), so your height differece is tan(angle)*(witdh of the array). You only have to calculate the height difference once. If y+height difference is greater than the height of the array, just subtract the height (or use the modulo operator).
Now that you have a starting point and an ending point you could use Bresenham's Algorithm to determine the points in between: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bresenham%27s_line_algorithm
You want to look for a space-filling-curve for example a morton curve or z-curve. If you want to subdivide the array in 4 tiles you may want to look for a hilbert curve or a moore curve.
Related
Assume we have a 3D grid that spans some 3D space. This grid is made out of cubes, the cubes need not have integer length, they can have any possible floating point length.
Our goal is, given a point and a direction, to check linearly each cube in our path once and exactly once.
So if this was just a regular 3D array and the direction is say in the X direction, starting at position (1,2,0) the algorithm would be:
for(i in number of cubes)
{
grid[1+i][2][0]
}
But of course the origin and the direction are arbitrary and floating point numbers, so it's not as easy as iterating through only one dimension of a 3D array. And the fact the side lengths of the cubes are also arbitrary floats makes it slightly harder as well.
Assume that your cube side lengths are s = (sx, sy, sz), your ray direction is d = (dx, dy, dz), and your starting point is p = (px, py, pz). Then, the ray that you want to traverse is r(t) = p + t * d, where t is an arbitrary positive number.
Let's focus on a single dimension. If you are currently at the lower boundary of a cube, then the step length dt that you need to make on your ray in order to get to the upper boundary of the cube is: dt = s / d. And we can calculate this step length for each of the three dimensions, i.e. dt is also a 3D vector.
Now, the idea is as follows: Find the cell where the ray's starting point lies in and find the parameter values t where the first intersection with the grid occurs per dimension. Then, you can incrementally find the parameter values where you switch from one cube to the next for each dimension. Sort the changes by the respective t value and just iterate.
Some more details:
cell = floor(p - gridLowerBound) / s <-- the / is component-wise division
I will only cover the case where the direction is positive. There are some minor changes if you go in the negative direction but I am sure that you can do these.
Find the first intersections per dimension (nextIntersection is a 3D vector):
nextIntersection = ((cell + (1, 1, 1)) * s - p) / d
And calculate the step length:
dt = s / d
Now, just iterate:
if(nextIntersection.x < nextIntersection.y && nextIntersection.x < nextIntersection.z)
cell.x++
nextIntersection.x += dt.x
else if(nextIntersection.y < nextIntersection.z)
cell.y++
nextIntersection.y += dt.y
else
cell.z++
nextIntersection.z += dt.z
end if
if cell is outside of grid
terminate
I have omitted the case where two or three cells are changed at the same time. The above code will only change one at a time. If you need this, feel free to adapt the code accordingly.
Well if you are working with floats, you can make the equation for the line in direction specifiedd. Which is parameterized by t. Because in between any two floats there is a finite number of points, you can simply check each of these points which cube they are in easily cause you have point (x,y,z) whose components should be in, a respective interval defining a cube.
The issue gets a little bit harder if you consider intervals that are, dense.
The key here is even with floats this is a discrete problem of searching. The fact that the equation of a line between any two points is a discrete set of points means you merely need to check them all to the cube intervals. What's better is there is a symmetry (a line) allowing you to enumerate each point easily with arithmetic expression, one after another for checking.
Also perhaps consider integer case first as it is same but slightly simpler in determining the discrete points as it is a line in Z_2^8?
I have a 3D Cartesian grid data that needs to be used to create a 3D regular mesh for interpolation method. x,y & z are 3 vectors with data points that are used to form this grid. My question is, how can i efficiently give 2 index to these points say,
where c000 is indexed as 1 point (1,1,1), c100 is indexed as 2 for (2,1,1) for (x,y,z)
coordinate points and another index to identify the 8 points forming the cube. Say if I have a point C, I must retrieve the nearest 8 points for interpolation. so for points c000,c100,c110,c010,c001,c101,c111,c011 point index and cube index. Since the data available is huge, the focus is to use faster implementation. pls give me some hints on how to proceed.
About the maths:
Identifying the cube which a point p surrounds requires a mapping
U ⊂ ℝ+**3 -> ℕ:
p' (= p - O_) -> hash_r(p');
"O_" being located at (min_x(G),min_y(G),min_z(G)) of the Grid G.
Along each axis, the cube numbering is trivial.
Given a compound cube number
n_ = (s,t,u)
and N_x, N_y, N_z being the size of your X_, Y_, Z_, a suitable hash would be
hash_n(n_) = s
| t * 2**(floor(log_2(N_x))+1)
| u * 2**(floor(log_2(N_x)) + floor(log_2(N_y)) + 2).
To calculate e.g. "s" for a point C, take
s = floor((C[0] - O_)/ a)
"a" being the edge length of the cubes.
About taking that to C++
Given you have enough space to allocate
(2**(floor(log_2(max(N_x, N_y, N_z)))+1)**3
buckets, a std::unordered_map<hash_t,Cube> using that (perfect) hash would offer O(1) for finding the cube for a point p.
A lesser pompous std::map<hash_t,Cube> using a less based on that hash would offer O(log(N)) find complexity.
I have a list of 2D points (x1,y1),(x2,y2)......(Xn,Yn) representing a curved segment, is there any formula to determine whether the direction of drawing that segment is clockwise or anti clockwise ?
any help is appreciated
Alternately, you can use a bit of linear algebra. If you have three points a, b, and c, in that order, then do the following:
1) create the vectors u = (b-a) = (b.x-a.x,b.y-a.y) and v = (c-b) ...
2) calculate the cross product uxv = u.x*v.y-u.y*v.x
3) if uxv is -ve then a-b-c is curving in clockwise direction (and vice-versa).
by following a longer curve along in the same manner, you can even detect when as 's'-shaped curve changes from clockwise to anticlockwise, if that is useful.
One possible approach. It should work reasonably well if the sampling of the line represented by your list of points is uniform and smooth enough, and if the line is sufficiently simple.
Subtract the mean to "center" the line.
Convert to polar coordinates to get the angle.
Unwrap the angle, to make sure its increments are meaningful.
Check if total increment is possitive or negative.
I'm assuming you have the data in x and y vectors.
theta = cart2pol(x-mean(x), y-mean(y)); %// steps 1 and 2
theta = unwrap(theta); %// step 3
clockwise = theta(end)<theta(1); %// step 4. Gives 1 if CW, 0 if ACW
This only considers the integrated effect of all points. It doesn't tell you if there are "kinks" or sections with different directions of turn along the way.
A possible improvement would be to replace the average of x and y by some kind of integral. The reason is: if sampling is denser in a region the average will be biased towards that, whereas the integral wouldn't.
Now this is my approach, as mentioned in a comment to the question -
Another approach: draw a line from starting point to ending point. This line is indeed a vector. A CW curve has most of its part on RHS of this line. For CCW, left.
I wrote a sample code to elaborate this idea. Most of the explanation can be found in comments in the code.
clear;clc;close all
%% draw a spiral curve
N = 30;
theta = linspace(0,pi/2,N); % a CCW curve
rho = linspace(1,.5,N);
[x,y] = pol2cart(theta,rho);
clearvars theta rho N
plot(x,y);
hold on
%% find "the vector"
vec(:,:,1) = [x(1), y(1); x(end), y(end)]; % "the vector"
scatter(x(1),y(1), 200,'s','r','fill') % square is the starting point
scatter(x(end),y(end), 200,'^','r','fill') % triangle is the ending point
line(vec(:,1,1), vec(:,2,1), 'LineStyle', '-', 'Color', 'r')
%% find center of mass
com = [mean(x), mean(y)]; % center of mass
vec(:,:,2) = [x(1), y(1); com]; % secondary vector (start -> com)
scatter(com(1), com(2), 200,'d','k','fill') % diamond is the com
line(vec(:,1,2), vec(:,2,2), 'LineStyle', '-', 'Color', 'k')
%% find rotation angle
dif = diff(vec,1,1);
[ang, ~] = cart2pol(reshape(dif(1,1,:),1,[]), reshape(dif(1,2,:),1,[]));
clearvars dif
% now you can tell the answer by the rotation angle
if ( diff(ang)>0 )
disp('CW!')
else
disp('CCW!')
end
One can always tell on which side of the directed line (the vector) a point is, by comparing two vectors, namely, rotating vector [starting point -> center of mass] to the vector [starting point -> ending point], and then comparing the rotation angle to 0. A few seconds of mind-animating can help understand.
I have a list of points moving in two dimensions (x- and y-axis) represented as rows in an array. I might have N points - i.e., N rows:
1 t1 x1 y1
2 t2 x2 y2
.
.
.
N tN xN yN
where ti, xi, and yi, is the time-index, x-coordinate, and the y-coordinate for point i. The time index-index ti is an integer from 1 to T. The number of points at each such possible time index can vary from 0 to N (still with only N points in total).
My goal is the filter out all the points that do not move in a certain way; or to keep only those that do. A point must move in a parabolic trajectory - with decreasing x- and y-coordinate (i.e., moving to the left and downwards only). Points with other dynamic behaviour must be removed.
Can I use a simple sorting mechanism on this array - and then analyse the order of the time-index? I have also considered the fact each point having the same time-index ti are physically distinct points, and so should be paired up with other points. The complexity of the problem grew - and now I turn to you.
NOTE: You can assume that the points are confined to a sub-region of the (x,y)-plane between two parabolic curves. These curves intersect only at only at one point: A point close to the origin of motion for any point.
More Information:
I have made some datafiles available:
MATLAB datafile (1.17 kB)
same data as CSV with semicolon as column separator (2.77 kB)
Necessary context:
The datafile hold one uint32 array with 176 rows and 5 columns. The columns are:
pixel x-coordinate in 175-by-175 lattice
pixel y-coordinate in 175-by-175 lattice
discrete theta angle-index
time index (from 1 to T = 10)
row index for this original sorting
The points "live" in a 175-by-175 pixel-lattice - and again inside the upper quadrant of a circle with radius 175. The points travel on the circle circumference in a counterclockwise rotation to a certain angle theta with horizontal, where they are thrown off into something close to a parabolic orbit. Column 3 holds a discrete index into a list with indices 1 to 45 from 0 to 90 degress (one index thus spans 2 degrees). The theta-angle was originally deduces solely from the points by setting up the trivial equations of motions and solving for the angle. This gives rise to a quasi-symmetric quartic which can be solved in close-form. The actual metric radius of the circle is 0.2 m and the pixel coordinate were converted from pixel-coordinate to metric using simple linear interpolation (but what we see here are the points in original pixel-space).
My problem is that some points are not behaving properly and since I need to statistics on the theta angle, I need to remove the points that certainly do NOT move in a parabolic trajoctory. These error are expected and fully natural, but still need to be filtered out.
MATLAB plot code:
% load data and setup variables:
load mat_points.mat;
num_r = 175;
num_T = 10;
num_gridN = 20;
% begin plotting:
figure(1000);
clf;
plot( ...
num_r * cos(0:0.1:pi/2), ...
num_r * sin(0:0.1:pi/2), ...
'Color', 'k', ...
'LineWidth', 2 ...
);
axis equal;
xlim([0 num_r]);
ylim([0 num_r]);
hold all;
% setup grid (yea... went crazy with one):
vec_tickValues = linspace(0, num_r, num_gridN);
cell_tickLabels = repmat({''}, size(vec_tickValues));
cell_tickLabels{1} = sprintf('%u', vec_tickValues(1));
cell_tickLabels{end} = sprintf('%u', vec_tickValues(end));
set(gca, 'XTick', vec_tickValues);
set(gca, 'XTickLabel', cell_tickLabels);
set(gca, 'YTick', vec_tickValues);
set(gca, 'YTickLabel', cell_tickLabels);
set(gca, 'GridLineStyle', '-');
grid on;
% plot points per timeindex (with increasing brightness):
vec_grayIndex = linspace(0,0.9,num_T);
for num_kt = 1:num_T
vec_xCoords = mat_points((mat_points(:,4) == num_kt), 1);
vec_yCoords = mat_points((mat_points(:,4) == num_kt), 2);
plot(vec_xCoords, vec_yCoords, 'o', ...
'MarkerEdgeColor', 'k', ...
'MarkerFaceColor', vec_grayIndex(num_kt) * ones(1,3) ...
);
end
Thanks :)
Why, it looks almost as if you're simulating a radar tracking debris from the collision of two missiles...
Anyway, let's coin a new term: object. Objects are moving along parabolae and at certain times they may emit flashes that appear as points. There are also other points which we are trying to filter out.
We will need some more information:
Can we assume that the objects obey the physics of things falling under gravity?
Must every object emit a point at every timestep during its lifetime?
Speaking of lifetime, do all objects begin at the same time? Can some expire before others?
How precise is the data? Is it exact? Is there a measure of error? To put it another way, do we understand how poorly the points from an object might fit a perfect parabola?
Sort the data with (index,time) as keys and for all locations of a point i see if they follow parabolic trajectory?
Which part are you facing problem? Sorting should be very easy. IMHO, it is the second part (testing if a set of points follow parabolic trajectory) that is difficult.
I need to implement a function which normalizes coordinates. I define normalize as (please suggest a better term if Im wrong):
Mapping entries of a data set from their natural range to values between 0 and 1.
Now this was easy in one dimension:
static List<float> Normalize(float[] nums)
{
float max = Max(nums);
float min = Min(nums);
float delta = max - min;
List<float> li = new List<float>();
foreach (float i in nums)
{
li.Add((i - min) / delta);
}
return li;
}
I need a 2D version as well and that one has to keep the aspect ratio intact. But Im having some troubles figuring out the math.
Although the code posted is in C# the answers need not to be.
Thanks in advance. :)
I am posting my response as an answer because I do not have enough points to make a comment.
My interpretation of the question: How do we normalize the coordinates of a set of points in 2 dimensional space?
A normalization operation involves a "shift and scale" operation. In case of 1 dimensional space this is fairly easy and intuitive (as pointed out by #Mizipzor).
normalizedX=(originalX-minX)/(maxX-minX)
In this case we are first shifing the value by a distance of minX and then scaling it by the range which is given by (maxX-minX). The shift operation ensures that the minimum moves to 0 and the scale operation squashes the distribution such that the distribution has an upper limit of 1
In case of 2d , simply dividing by the largest dimension is not enought. Why?
Consider the simplified case with just 2 points as shown below.
The maximum value of any dimension is the Y value of point B and this 10000.
Coordinates of normalized A=>5000/10000,8000/10000 ,i.e 0.5,0.8
Coordinates of normalized A=>7000/10000,10000/10000 ,i.e 0.7,1.0
The X and Y values are all with 0 and 1. However, the distribution of the normalized values is far from uniform. The minimum value is just 0.5. Ideally this should be closer to 0.
Preferred approach for normalizing 2d coordinates
To get a more even distribution we should do a "shift" operation around the minimum of all X values and minimum of all Y values. This could be done around the mean of X and mean of Y as well. Considering the above example,
the minimum of all X is 5000
the minimum of all Y is 8000
Step 1 - Shift operation
A=>(5000-5000,8000-8000), i.e (0,0)
B=>(7000-5000,10000-8000), i.e. (2000,2000)
Step 2 - Scale operation
To scale down the values we need some maximum. We could use the diagonal AB whose length is 2000
A=>(0/2000,0/2000), i.e. (0,0)
B=>(2000/2000,2000/2000)i.e. (1,1)
What happens when there are more than 2 points?
The approach remains similar. We find the coordinates of the smallest bounding box which fits all the points.
We find the minimum value of X (MinX) and minimum value of Y (MinY) from all the points and do a shift operation. This changes the origin to the lower left corner of the bounding box.
We find the maximum value of X (MaxX) and maximum value of Y (MaxY) from all the points.
We calculate the length of the diagonal connecting (MinX,MinY) and (MaxX,MaxY) and use this value to do a scale operation.
.
length of diagonal=sqrt((maxX-minX)*(maxX-minX) + (maxY-minY)*(maxY-minY))
normalized X = (originalX - minX)/(length of diagonal)
normalized Y = (originalY - minY)/(length of diagonal)
How does this logic change if we have more than 2 dimensions?
The concept remains the same.
- We find the minimum value in each of the dimensions (X,Y,Z)
- We find the maximum value in each of the dimensions (X,Y,Z)
- Compute the length of the diagonal as a scaling factor
- Use the minimum values to shift the origin.
length of diagonal=sqrt((maxX-minX)*(maxX-minX)+(maxY-minY)*(maxY-minY)+(maxZ-minZ)*(maxZ-minZ))
normalized X = (originalX - minX)/(length of diagonal)
normalized Y = (originalY - minY)/(length of diagonal)
normalized Z = (originalZ - minZ)/(length of diagonal)
It seems you want each vector (1D, 2D or ND) to have length <= 1.
If that's the only requirement, you can just divide each vector by the length of the longest one.
double max = maximum (|vector| for each vector in 'data');
foreach (Vector v : data) {
li.add(v / max);
}
That will make the longest vector in result list to have length 1.
But this won't be equivalent of your current code for 1-dimensional case, as you can't find minimum or maximum in a set of points on the plane. Thus, no delta.
Simple idea: Find out which dimension is bigger and normalize in this dimension. The second dimension can be computed by using the ratio. This way the ratio is kept and your values are between 0 and 1.