Is there known way of assigning natural numbers (ordering) of Mandelbrot fractal edge points? Obviously there is an infinite number of such points, but at certain level of detail we can count them and order them. I'd like to order them in such way so they form a continuous path without any intersections.
Edge points can be ordered with external angles, as the landing point of external rays. External angles are measured in turns, usually binary
Here is the image by Claude
Related
I have been using networkX to compute the shortest path distance between two points A and B in a graph thanks to Dijkstra's algorithm.
The edges of my graph represent road segments, and the nodes the connections between segments. The weight function is the segment length, so that the returned path distance is the actual geographical distance.
However, the calculated paths are sometimes unrealistic for my use. More specifically, I would like to prevent the algorithm from using paths implying very sharp turns between two successive edges. This implies that the weight of a particular edge is a function of the edge itself, but also of its precedessor in the path (so that the turn angle can be computed and sharp turns dismissed).
As a (simplistic) example, let's consider the below graph (assuming that the nodes and represented according to their actual geographical position). For the sake of simplicity, each edge has a weight (or distance) equal to 1.
The shortest path from A to B is shown in green, and the corresponding distance is 2.
Shortest path without "sharp turn" constraint
However, the proposed path involve a sharp turn at node C (which can be detected based on the geographical coordinates of nodes A, B and C). This kind of turn should be forbidden, such that the proposed shortest path becomes the one described below.
Shortest path with "sharp turn" constraint
The distance is now 6, but the path avoids the transition A-B-C which involved a sharp turn.
What do you think are my options to implement such requirement?
I have done something similar by making it a multi edge graph. Such as there is more than one edge between any two nodes. The 2nd edge in your case could be a numerical value identifying the orientation of the edge(road).
Considering south to north as 0, you could assign -180 to 180 to each orientation and then your algorithm need only compute the difference between the two weights of these edges to figure out if the node is sharp turn and thus eliminate it.
Look up “multgraph” or “multidigraph” in networkx api for implementation
One edge has to be distance other has to be orientation, encoding both orientation and distance to a single weight will require trignometric coding from a central (0) point
I'm trying to construct a kind of graph in matlab:
For each vertex I know its neighbours (thus, I have the edge list), and the distance between vertex-neighbour. This distance is saved as weight of the edge.
So, the weights are actually the physical distances between the nodes.
For now I could only associate a wider line to bigger weights but is not enough.
I actually would like having longer lines associated to a bigger weights, so that I could visually construct a suitable geometry from my data.
Any tips?
EDIT: The distances are such that the drawing is possibile.
There are a lot of similar questions but I can't get a clear answer out of them. So, I want to represent latitude and longitude in a 2D space such that I can calculate the distances if necessary.
There is the equirectangular approach which can calculate the distances but this is not exactly what I want.
There is the UTM but it seems there are many zones and letters. So the distance should take into consideration the changing of zone which is not trivial.
I want to have a representation such that i can deal with x,y as numbers in Euclidean space and perform the standard distance formula on them without multiplying with the diameter of Earth every time I need to calculate the distance between two points.
Is there anything in Matlab that can change lat/long to x,y in Euclidean space?
I am not a matlab speciallist but the answer is not limited to matlab. Generally in GIS when you want to perform calculations in Euclidean space you have to apply 'projection' to the data. There are various types of projections, one of the most popular being Transverse Mercator
The common feature of such projections is the fact you can't precisely represent whole world with it. I mean the projection is based on chosen meridian and is precise enough up to some distance from it (e.g. Gauss Krueger projection is quite accurate around +-500km from the meridian.
You will always have to choose some kind of 'zone' or 'meridian', regardless of what projection you choose, because it is impossible to transform a sphere into plane without any deformations (be it distance, angle or area).
So if you are working on a set of data located around some geographical area you can simply transform (project) the data and treat it as normal Enclidean 2d space.
But if you think of processing data located around the whole world you will have to properly cluster and project it using proper zone.
I want to extract orientations of strongly unclosed edges from a binary image. The image consists of blobs, blob rows and unsharp edges as shown below. In the end every pixel should be assigned to an information about the orientation of the edge. If the existence of an edge is not confident the point should not be assigned. Parameters of a line or a whole curve would be fine but are not necessarily needed. The edges to be found are marked as red curves:
I tried a lot and I hope for some hints in regarding to methods I could use.
Hough Transformation with Lines: Because of the existence of curves as well as point clouds it is difficult to extract the relevant extreme values of the HT.
Hough Transformation with Ellipses: Same disadvantages as ‘HT with Lines’. Plus the amount of curves and point arrangements to be detected exceeds the limits of a fast process.
Local masks: Go from pixel to pixel and estimate the orientation with the help of a directed mask (Example: Count all white pixels for every considered direction and make a decision in regarding to the highest number of found pixels). By using this method the view on bigger structures like whole blob rows is obscured. It is easy to see that this method will fail in clouds an edge goes through.
I guess an estimation of the orientation by considering local and global information is the only way. I need to know something about the connectivity of these blobs before making local decisions.
Btw, I am using MATLAB.
What about using image moments? you can calculate the angle, mayor axis, and eccentricity of each single blob and define parameters to merge interceeding ones.
You can use the regionprops() or start from scratch with this code I just so happend to have here:
function M=ImMoment(Image,ii,jj)
ImSize=size(Image);
M=0;
for k=1:ImSize(1);
for l=1:ImSize(2);
M=M+k^ii*l^jj*Image(k,l);
end
end
end
and for the covariance matrix:
function [Matrix,Centroid,Angle,Len,Wid,Eccentricity]=CovMat(Image)
Centroid=[ImMoment(Image,0,1)/ImMoment(Image,0,0),...
ImMoment(Image,1,0)/ImMoment(Image,0,0)];
Miu20=ImMoment(Image,0,2)/ImMoment(Image,0,0)-Centroid(1)^2;
Miu02=ImMoment(Image,2,0)/ImMoment(Image,0,0)-Centroid(2)^2;
Miu11=ImMoment(Image,1,1)/ImMoment(Image,0,0)-Centroid(1)*Centroid(2);
Matrix=[Miu20,Miu11
Miu11,Miu02];
Lambda1=(Miu20+Miu02)/2+sqrt(4*Miu11^2+(Miu20-Miu02)^2)/2;
Lambda2=(Miu20+Miu02)/2-sqrt(4*Miu11^2+(Miu20-Miu02)^2)/2;
Angle=1/2*atand(2*Miu11/(Miu20-Miu02));
Len=4*sqrt(max(Lambda1,Lambda2));
Wid=4*sqrt(min(Lambda1,Lambda2));
Eccentricity=sqrt(1-Lambda2/Lambda1);
end
Play a little bit around with that, I'm pretty sure that should work.
the output of some processing consists of a binary map with several connected areas.
The objective is, for each area, to compute and draw on the image a line crossing the area on its longest axis, but not extending further. It is very important that the line lies just inside the area, therefore ellipse fitting is not very good.
Any hint on how to do achieve this result in an efficient way?
If you have the image processing toolbox you can use regionprops which will give you several standard measures of any binary connected region. This includes
You can also get the tightest rectangular bounding box, centroid, perimeter, orientation. These will all help you in ellipse fitting.
Depending on how you would like to draw your lines, the regionprops function also returns the length for major and minor axes in 2-D connected regions and does it on a per-connected-region basis, giving you a vector of axis lengths. If you specify 4 neighbor connected you are fairly sure that the length will be exclusively within the connected region. But this is not guaranteed since `regionprops' calculates major axis length of an ellipse that has the same normalized second central moment as the connected region.
My first inclination would be to treat the pixels as 2D points and use principal components analysis. PCA will give you the major axis of each region (princomp if you have the stat toolbox).
Regarding making line segments and not lines, not knowing anything about the shape of these regions, an efficient method doesn't occur to me. Assuming the region could have any arbitrary shape, you could just trace along each line until you reach the edge of the region. Then repeat in the other direction.
I assumed you already have the binary image divided into regions. If this isn't true you could use bwlabel (if the regions aren't touching) or k-means (if they are) first.