NetLogo: World size as a decimal - netlogo

In NetLogo, I'm trying to create a hexagonal grid where all of the hexagons are equilateral. While the examples in the models library create hexagonal grids, they aren't equilateral, so I can't use the same method that they did. In order to make this grid and still have the world wrap horizontally, I need to set the world's width to be a very specific decimal, but I can't find a way to set it to be anything but an integer.
Is it possible to set the dimensions of the world to decimals? If so, how?

No, this is impossible. The world size is measured in patches, and the dimensions of a patch are always 1x1. There's no such thing as a partial patch.

Related

Grid based dungeon with random room sizes

I'm making a game, where levels are grid based.
At first, I have rectangle MxM cells. Then within this rectangle I have to put rooms. Room is another rectangle which is AxB cells, where 2 <= A, B <= 4. Besides, It's necessary to put N rooms in each row and N ones in each column. They should fill all the space, there can't be empty space between them. In other words, I have to feel rectangle with other rectangles the way that there will no be empty space between them and they will form a grid with N rows and N columns.
What I did:
I store information about rooms in form of their left-top corner, calculate it and then put rooms based on their and neighbor's corners. To do that:
Divide grid on rooms 3x3
In each of 3x3 rooms define area which is obligatory floor (2x2 square, let's call it red area)
In loop for each room count it's neighbor x and y corner position the way that it doesn't cross none of the obligatory floor ares. For that:
a. Get red area of current room and it's neighbors. Set corner somewhere between them, making sure the dimensions of the room are within range above.
b. Resolve collisions, when it's not possible to set random corner. For instance, if x position of room above isn't equal to our room, then we can't put horizontal wall between to rooms righter them in random y position, because in that case these rooms will overlap each other.
Some other stuff with converting information about corners to rooms themselves
So, what's the problem? My code with a lot of if-statements and crutches became so unreadable and huge that it almost impossible to test and find bugs. Approach I used seems to work but it's impossible to control the way it's working or not working.
Another issue is that I want to have more control on how it looks like. Grid must be interesting, which means that neighbor rooms are preferably not of the same size. There's an example (grid) of such a grid (with red areas that are gray there), which is not bad.
Is there some alternative to solve this? In other questions I saw a lot of similar solutions, but all of them doesn't assume that there's fixed amount of rows and columns.
Recommend me some articles I haven't managed to find, probably, literature devoted to this topic, or point the direction where to move and find a working solution.
A traditional method of generating grids containing rooms is to use Binary-Space-Partition trees.
One thing about that method is that it often produces grids that are less densely populated than your example. You might be able to modify some BSP example code and make the map more dense though.
Another possible approach would be to generate the rectangles first, (perhaps with a border along two edges for the gap) then try to pack them using a rectangle packing algorithm. This previous answer has several potential packing algorithms.

AnyLogic - Can density map be more accurate?

Can you change the size of pixels in Density Map?
I suspect that the size of density map pixels is based on agent/pedestrian size. Can it be modified, so that pixels are smaller and leave more precise trace?
Currently, my density map leaves huge pixels that are very difficult to use as reliable information.
EDIT: Screenshot below,
Thanks,
Peter
I am pretty sure it's not possible, the density map has a resolution of 1 meter (whatever the equivalent to 1 meter is by your scale object) and there's no way to change it (as far as I know)
But, what you have to make up for this, is the canvas object that you can find in the presentation palette. With the canvas object you can define your own resolution but you also have to code your own density map using your own personalized rules. Check the help documentation to understand how to use this and check the wondering elephants model to understand how to make changes dynamically.

How to have a generator class in shader glsl with amplify shader editor

i want to create a shader that can cover a surface with "circles" from many random positions.
the circles keep growing until all surface covered with them.
here my first try with amplify shader editor.
the problem is i don't know how make this shader that create array of "point maker" with random positions.also i want to controll circles with
c# example:
point_maker = new point_maker[10];
point_maker[1].position = Vector2.one;
point_maker[1].scale = 1;
and etc ...
Heads-up: That's probably not the way to do what you're looking for, as every pixel in your shader would need to loop over all your input points, while each of those pixels will only be covered by one at most. It's a classic case of embracing the benefits of the parallel nature of shaders. (The keyword for me here is 'random', as in 'random looking').
There's 2 distinct problems here: generating circles, and masking them.
I would go onto generating a grid out of your input space (most likely your UV coordinates so I'll assume that from here), by taking the fractional part of the coords scaled by some value: UV (usually) go between 0 and 1, so if you want 100 circles you'd multiply the coord by 10. You now have a grid of 100 pieces of UVs, where you can do something similar to what you have to generate the circle (tip: dot product a vector on itself gives the square distance, which is much cheaper to compute).
You want some randomness, so you need to add some offset to the center of the circle. You need some sort of random number (there might be some in ASE I can't remember, or make one your own - there's plenty of that you look online) that is unique per cell of the grid. To do this you'd input the remainder of your frac() as value to your hash/random method. You also need to limit that offset depending on the radius of the circle so it doesn't touch the sides of the cell. You can overlay more than one layer of circles if you want more coverage as well.
Second step is to figure out if you want to display those circles at all, and for this you could make the drawing conditional to the distance from the center of the circle to an input coordinate you provide to the shader, by some threshold. (it doesn't have to be an 'if' condition per se, it could be clamping the value to the bg color or something)
I'm making a lot of assumptions on what you want to do here, and if you have stronger conditions on the point distribution you might be better off rendering quads to a render texture for example, but that's a whole other topic :)

Unity TerrainData not compatible with absolute elevations?

Is it possible for the Unity TerrainData structure to take absolute elevations? I have a terrain generator that generates absolute elevations, but they are huge. The perlin octave with the highest amplitude is the one that decides what altitude the entire map is at, with an amplitude of 2500 and wavelength 10000. In order for my map to tile properly and transition between altitudes seamlessly, I need to be able to use this system of absolute altitude. I would scale down my generator's output to fit in the limited space (between 0 and 1), and stretch the y scale of the TerrainData, but it will lose too much precision.
What can I do? Is there a way I can use elevations that may vary by as much as 2500 meters?
One thing that might be important is that there will never be that much variation in the space of a single Terrain object, but across many, many Terrain objects, it is possible for the player to traverse that kind of altitude.
I've tested changing different variables, and I've reached the following conclusion...
Heightmap Resolution does not mean precision of data (some people I asked believed it determined the number of possible height values). It means the number of samples per row and column. This, along with size determines how far apart samples are, and effectively how large the polygons of the terrain are. It's my impression that there is no way to improve precision, although I now know how to increase the height of the terrain object. Instead, since I will never have 2500 meters of elevation difference in the same terrain object, each piece of terrain generated by my generator I will put in a terrain object that is positioned and sized to contain all of the data in that square. The data will also have to be converted so that it will fit, but other than that, I see no drawbacks to this method.
Important note: Resolution must be 2^n + 1 where n is any number. If you provide a different value for resolution, the next permitted value down will be selected (always the one below your choice).

Problem drawing a polygon on data clusters in MATLAB

I have some data points which I have devided into them into some clusters with some clustering algorithms as the picture below:(it might takes some time for the image to appear)
alt text http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/05a807bc42.png
Each color represents different cluster. I have to draw polygons around each cluster. I use convhull for this reason. But as you can see the polygon for the red cluster is very big and covers a lot of areas, which is not the one I am looking for. I need to draw lines(ploygons) exactly around my data sets. For example in the picture above I want a polygon that is drawn exactly the same(and around) as the red cluster with the 3 branches. In other words, in this case I need a polygon with 3 branches to cover my red clusters not that big polygon that covers the whole area. Can anyone help me with this?
Please Note that the solution should be general, because the clusters will change in each run of the algorithm, so it needs to be in a way that is general.
I am not sure this is a fully specified question. I see this variants on this question come up quite often.
Why this can not really be answered here: Imagine six points, three in an equilateral triangle with another three in an equilateral triangle inside it in the same orientation.
What is the correct hull around this? Is it just the convex hull? Is it the inner triangle with three line spurs coming out from it? Does it matter what the relative sizes of the triangles are? Should you have to specify that parameter then?
If your clusters are very compact, you could try the following:
Create a grid, say with a spacing of 0.1.
Set every pixel in the grid to 1 if there's at least one data point covering it, set the pixel to 0 if there is no data point covering the pixel.
You may need to run imclose on your mask in order to fill little holes inside that have not been colored due to sheer bad luck.
Extract the border pixels using, e.g. bwperim. This is the outline of the polygon you're looking for.