So I have 3 lines (technically patches) that have some transparency enabled. These lines were generated by the patchline FEX submission. The FEX entry works great by making patches seem like lines by adding a NaN to the end of the data so it doesn't create a big black patch between the end points of my line.
My lines looks like this
__ __
\ /
_ \ / _
\ \__/ /
\______/
The patch extends from the left end point to the right end point in a straight line across the top and then follows the line on the bottom. The actual patch is hidden (not drawn) though so all the user sees is the lines
The problem is if I wanted to click the bottom hump of the top line, it acts like I clicked the bottom line because it is part of that patch.
I have thought of a couple of workarounds and was hoping you guys could point out flaws or add ideas I might have missed with my workarounds.
Workaround #1
Ideally, I would create an actual line (line series obj.) over the transparent lines. I would turn hittest off on the patches and I would make the actual line invisible, but turn hittest on. The problem I am 99% sure exists is that if visibilty is off, you can't click the object. If anybody has a work around to that issue (documented or otherwise), that would be great.
Workaround #2
Turn the patchline hittest property to off. Make mock line objs. that follow the patchline coords. and have a line width very very small so as to make the line ideally pretty much invisible and have hit test clicks point to these lines instead. Has anybody tried something like this before? (I'm at work and can't try it now)
Workaround #3
NOTE THAT I REALLY DONT WANT TO DO THIS It is of course possible to turn off hittest for the patch/line objs and use the axes buttondown to figure out what patch obj (just the line part) it was closest to.
Once again, any insight would be much appreciated either about my possible work arounds, the situation in general, etc.
Thanks, Shaun
The problem can be illustrated with two line-thick patches, one of which is NOT parallel to the axes:
patch([2 8 8],[5 10 10],'w','EdgeColor','b','EdgeAlpha',0.4,'LineWidth',3)
patch([2 8 8],[4 4 4],'w','EdgeColor','r','EdgeAlpha',0.4,'LineWidth',3)
xlim([0 10])
ylim([3 11])
You cannot select but those lines which are parallel to one of the axes.
Workaround #1: impossible.
Workaround #2: quite visible, why would you need transparent lines then?
Workaround #3: the only way...
Workaround alternative: submit to the TMW a technical request to improve clickability of patches.
Oleg, your initial post somehow inspired me to come up with my elegant solution. (Don't ask me how, just accept my "thank you" haha)
The elegant solution to my problem required me to go beyond patch properties and turn to the axes child order. Under the assumption that none of the lines would intersect each other, I was able to plot them in a order where the bottom one was first, then the second lowest, etc. until I got to the top (effectively rearranging child order).
If anybody else stumbles upon this, what you can do (assuming your lines don't intersect) is to sort the first Y (or whatever values) to go from lowest to highest (in this case) in your plot, and make sure your sort function returns the indicies.
I don't have my computer in front of me, but what you end up doing is effectively making an acontinuous for loop, looping through the indicies.
something like:
for i=[6 2 5 4 1 3]
plot(X(:,i),Y(:,i))
end
Where the 6th column was my lowest data, 2nd column was second lowest on plot, etc.
Related
I am just curious if it's possible to alter the location of the labels in NetLogo. For example in the image below the word "La Grande Soufriere", is it possible to move it above the breed instead of below (as you can see it gets in the way of the other agents. Another case is the Habitants PMA (Actual name is Vieux Habitants) but only half of its name has appeared since the rest of its off-screen. I tried to manually type on a close-by patch but since I have used a fill color, it doesn't appear at all (it's covered by the fill color if you know what I mean). Does anyone have a solution for this?
I am just curious if it's possible to alter the location of the labels in NetLogo.
The short answer is that it is not possible.
The slightly longer answer is that there are ways around it, but they're not very satisfying.
If you want to alter the horizontal location, you can pad your label with spaces at the end or the beginning of the string to move it left or right, respectively.
If you want to alter the vertical location, or have more control over it, you can always create a "dummy" turtle to display the label. You can hide the dummy turtle without hidding its label by setting the size of the turtle to zero or by creating an empty turtle shape and using that for it.
I don't think it matters in your case, since you seem to want to label only stationary turtles, but if you wanted a dummy to move with a particular turtle, you can create a hidden link between them and tie them.
There might be other creative ways to deal with labels (and I'd be curious to read about them in other answers), but that's all I can think of for now.
edit: I figured it out and don't see a place to mark this as answered. Thanks for the suggestions though everyone!
A couple of weeks ago I was trying to force MATLAB to display a y = 0 line for a plot I was making. It was easy enough to search for, but apparently I made it automatic. Now I can't find anything even remotely similar to this new problem. When I run this code:
plot(x,y_known,x,y_simulated);
legend('Simulated','This stupid line right here','Known')
I get the following:
Notice the line at y = 0, it is not in the code. I wouldn't really care, but it is the second line in the figure and it messes up my ability to create a legend. i.e., if the legend entry was just:
legend('Simulated','Known')
then the legend would say that the known value was green, which is certainly not the case.
I don't really want to create a handle for every single line I plot in the future, and would much rather just get rid of this line. Can anyone provide some help, or at least point me in the right direction?
edit: The y = 0 line also changes its line properties based on whatever is supplied to the first plot entry. So plot(x,y1,'--',x,y2); makes both y1 and y = 0 dashed, but plot(x,y1,x,y2,'--'); would just render the second line dashed
As an absolute last resort (after failing to find how the line actually gets there), what you can do is access the Children property of your axes and delete the child which is the line you don't want.
Something along the lines of:
ch = get(gca,'Children');
delete(ch(2)); %// Where 2 should be replaced by the child index you're trying to delete.
There was an errant two much earlier in the code, giving a variable 2 columns instead of one. I didn't realize Matlab would be helpful be helpful and plot both columns (I've always explicitly told it to plot both). Just another case of someone not thinking in vector mode when using Matlab!
I've been working on an image segmentation problem and can't seem to get a good idea for my most recent problem.
This is what I have at the moment:
Click here for image. (This is only a generic example.)
Is there a robust algorithm that can automatically discard the right square as not belonging to the group of the other four squares (that I know should always be stacked more or less on top of each other) ?
It can sometimes be the case, that one of the stacked boxes is not found, so there's a gap or that the bogus box is on the left side.
Your input is greatly appreciated.
If you have a way of producing BW images like your example:
s = regionprops(BW, 'centroid');
centroids = cat(1, s.Centroid);
xpos = centroids(:,1); should then be the x-positions of the boxes.
From here you have multiple ways to go, depending on whether you always have just one separated box and one set of grouped boxes or not. For the "one bogus box far away, rest closely grouped" case (away from Matlab, so this is unchecked) you could even do something as simple as:
d = abs(xpos-median(xpos));
bogusbox = centroids(d==max(d),:);
imshow(BW);
hold on;
plot(bogusbox(1),bogusbox(2),'r*');
Making something that's robust for your actual use case which I am assuming doesn't consist of neat boxes is another matter; as suggested in comments, you need some idea of how close together the positioning of your good boxes is, and how separate the bogus box(es) will be.
For example, you could use other regionprops measurements such as 'BoundingBox' or 'Extrema' and define some sort of measurement of how much the boxes overlap in x relative to each other, then group using that (this could be made to work even if you have multiple stacks in an image).
I want to create a vertical bar plot. This is my code:
bar (x, sensiv);
title ('Promedio X')
xlabel('Nm')
ylabel('Refl.')
The problem is it looks like a stair plot. I've tried to add (x,sensiv, 'stacked') but it doesn't work. It looks grouped, as you can see in the next image:
graph http://imageshack.us/a/img689/9449/capturawv.jpg
I think it's because of x-axis but I couldn't change it. How can I do it? Does somebody knows how can I do it?
EDIT
Thanks Colin! I've tried to zoom and I understand what you mean and I've tried with different values, as slayton and you said.
I think that maybe it's the way I've code the plot, it is possible?
abc=0;
for p=(61:201)
abc(p)=out1_c;
end
for p=(151:301)
abc(p)=out2_c;
end
for p=(231:380)
abc(p)=out3_c;
end
for p=(381:596)
abc(p)=out4_c;
end
for p=(1152:1531)
abc(p)=out5_c;
end
for p=(1651:2051)
abc(p)=out7_c;
end
for p=(2052:2151)
abc(p)= 0;
end
The default value for the width of the bars in a bar plot is 0.8, so given that you're not currently specifying the width, you should have gaps in between each bar. This is going to sound really obvious, but have you tried zooming in on the bar plot that is created? For some datasets, the bar function will return a plot that looks like a stair plot, but in fact has gaps if you zoom in far enough. If this is the case, then you should be able to get the gaps you want by tinkering with the width parameter as suggested by slayton.
EDIT
Okay. First things first. If you want to post additional information, you should add it to your question, NOT post it as a new answer! You can do this by clicking the edit button just below where your question is on the page. To make things more readable, you might preface your edit with a capitalized bold-face heading "EDIT" as I have done here. If you are able, try now to move the additional information you've given back into your question, and then delete the answer.
Second, I have to be honest, the additional information you posted was somewhat confusing. However, I think I understand what you want now. You want 7 bars coming up to the heights out1_c, out2_c, ..., out7_c (variable names taken from your additional information) with a small gap between each bar, and the x-axis to reflect (approximately) the intervals 450-550, 550-650, etc.
Well, if you want 7 bars, then you want your input to only have seven elements. Set:
y = [out1_c; out2_c; out3_c; out4_c; out5_c; out6_c; out7_c];
y now gives you the heights your bars will come up to on the y-axis. To locate the bars on the x-axis, define a vector x that also has seven elements, where each element gives the midpoint of where you want the bar to be on the x-axis. For example:
x = [100; 200; 300; 400; 500; 600; 700];
Then just use bar(x, y). This should get you started.
A final point on the code you posted, you can actually completely avoid the loops: read up on vectorization. But if you are going to insist on loops, the first and most important rule is to preallocate your vectors/matrices. In your code abc starts out as a scalar (a 1 by 1 matrix), but then for every p, you are adding an element at index p. What is actually happening in the background is for every p, matlab is scrapping the current abc you have in memory, and building it again from scratch with the additional element. As you might expect, this will slow down your code by many orders of magnitude.
You can set the width of the individual bars by passing a value between 0 and 1 to bar. Passing 1 indicates that there should be no space between the bars
bar(x,y,1)
Passing anything less than 1 will reduce the bar sizes and introduce spacing between the individual bars
bar(x,y,.5)
When I make a figure in Matlab, with a legend and a rectangle that touches the y axis (strange, I know) upon exporting the figure to eps (or pdf) I've noticed that the rectangle obtains the line-style of the last line drawn (rather than what the rectangle was drawn with)
This behaviour also occurs for rectangles drawn after the one that touches the axis...
This doesn't happen if the rectangle is drawn before the legend is created....
Needless to say, it took me half a day to create a minimal example:
clf
L=plot(X,sin(X),'--');
legend(L,'sin(x)')
rectangle('position',[0.001,.1,.7,.7])
rectangle('position',[0,.5,.6,.7])
rectangle('position',[0.001,.3,.5,.7])
%legend(L,'sin(x)')
On the screen the 3 rectangle have solid lines, as they should. but once they are exported, the result has the last two with dashed lines (like the sin(x)). If the legend command is done later (as in the commented out line), everything works as it should....
Is this a feature or a bug?
This is not a feature. I am submitting this to development.
You found a workaround that works with minimal code gymnastics. I would document it in your code so someone does not change it unknowingly and move on.
If you are open to other output formats, notice this is not an issue with formats that use an output filter of MATLAB.
http://www.mathworks.com/access/helpdesk/help/techdoc/ref/print.html
(Graphic Format Files section, right column in table)
-Doug, Advanced Support at MathWorks dealing with graphical issues.