我试图创建一个快速的2D点内多边形算法,用于命中测试(例如多边形.contains(p:点))。对有效技术的建议将不胜感激。
当前回答
为了完整性,这里是nirg提供的算法的lua实现,由Mecki讨论:
function pnpoly(area, test)
local inside = false
local tx, ty = table.unpack(test)
local j = #area
for i=1, #area do
local vxi, vyi = table.unpack(area[i])
local vxj, vyj = table.unpack(area[j])
if (vyi > ty) ~= (vyj > ty)
and tx < (vxj - vxi)*(ty - vyi)/(vyj - vyi) + vxi
then
inside = not inside
end
j = i
end
return inside
end
变量区域是一个点的表,这些点依次存储为2D表。例子:
> A = {{2, 1}, {1, 2}, {15, 3}, {3, 4}, {5, 3}, {4, 1.5}}
> T = {2, 1.1}
> pnpoly(A, T)
true
GitHub Gist的链接。
其他回答
在大多数情况下,这是一个比其他算法都快的算法。
它又新又雅致。我们花费O(n * log(n))时间构建一个表,允许我们在O(log(n) + k)时间内测试多边形中的点。
与光线跟踪或角度不同,使用扫描光束表可以更快地对同一多边形进行多次检查。我们必须预先构建一个扫描束活动边表,这是大多数代码正在做的事情。
We calculate the scanbeam and the active edges for that position in the y-direction. We make a list of points sorted by their y-component and we iterate through this list, for two events. Start-Y and End-Y, we track the active edges as we process the list. We process the events in order and for each scanbeam we record the y-value of the event and the active edges at each event (events being start-y and end-y) but we only record these when our event-y is different than last time (so everything at the event point is processed before we mark it in our table).
我们得到我们的表格:
[] p6p5、p6p7 p6p5, p6p7, p2p3, p2p1 p6p7, p5p4, p2p3, p3p1 p7p8, p5p4, p2p3, p2p1 p7p8, p5p4, p3p4, p2p1 p7p8 p2p1、 p7p8、p1p0 p8p0、p1p0 []
在构建该表之后,实际执行工作的代码只有几行。
注意:这里的代码使用复数值作为点。所以。real是。x。imag是。y。
def point_in_scantable(actives_table, events, xi, point):
beam = bisect(events, point.imag) - 1 # Binary search in sorted array.
actives_at_y = actives_table[beam]
total = sum([point.real > xi(e, point.imag) for e in actives_at_y])
return bool(total % 2)
我们对事件进行二进制搜索,以找到特定值的actives_at_y。对于在y点的所有活动,我们计算在我们点的特定y点的x段值。每次x截距大于点的x分量时加1。然后对总数乘以2。(这是偶数-奇数填充规则,你可以很容易地适应任何其他填充规则)。
完整的代码:
from bisect import bisect
def build_edge_list(polygon):
edge_list = []
for i in range(1, len(polygon)):
if (polygon[i].imag, polygon[i].real) < (polygon[i - 1].imag, polygon[i - 1].real):
edge_list.append((polygon[i], i))
edge_list.append((polygon[i - 1], ~i))
else:
edge_list.append((polygon[i], ~i))
edge_list.append((polygon[i - 1], i))
def sort_key(e):
return e[0].imag, e[0].real, ~e[1]
edge_list.sort(key=sort_key)
return edge_list
def build_scanbeam(edge_list):
actives_table = []
events = []
y = -float("inf")
actives = []
for pt, index in edge_list:
if y != pt.imag:
actives_table.append(list(actives))
events.append(y)
if index >= 0:
actives.append(index)
else:
actives.remove(~index)
y = pt.imag
return actives_table, events
def point_in_polygon(polygon, point):
def x_intercept(e, y):
pt0 = polygon[e-1]
pt1 = polygon[e]
if pt1.real - pt0.real == 0:
return pt0.real
m = (pt1.imag - pt0.imag) / (pt1.real - pt0.real)
b = pt0.imag - (m * pt0.real)
return (y - b) / m
edge_list = build_edge_list(polygon)
actives_table, events = build_scanbeam(edge_list)
try:
if len(point):
return [point_in_scantable(actives_table, events, x_intercept, p) for p in point]
except TypeError:
return point_in_scantable(actives_table, events, x_intercept, point)
def point_in_scantable(actives_table, events, xi, point):
beam = bisect(events, point.imag) - 1 # Binary search in sorted array.
actives_at_y = actives_table[beam]
total = sum([point.real > xi(e, point.imag) for e in actives_at_y])
return bool(total % 2)
如果忽略,则扫描表的构建时间为O(n*log(n))。我们实际上是在O(log(n) + k)时间内查到的。其中n是多边形中段数的大小,k是该多边形中典型的活动边数。其他的光线追踪方法实际上需要O(n)时间。每次我们检查一个点,它迭代整个多边形。所以即使有这个明显的次优实现,它也轻而易举地打败了其他所有的。
There's a few performance tricks that could be done, for example, we can lower the time complexity to O(log(n) + log(k)) time. To do this we would implement Bentley-Ottmann into the sweep line, and rather than processing the intersections as different events, we split the lines at the intersections. We then also sort the active edges by their x-intercepts. We then know that no intersections occur during a scanbeam and since we sorted our segments (taking care to order them correctly within the scanbeam even if they start at the same initial point (you need to look at the slopes, or just compare midpoints of the segments). We then have a sorted intersection-less actives lists scanbeam table which means we can binary search into active edge list as well. Though that sounds like a lot of work for a value of k which is going to be typically 2 or maybe 4.
此外,由于这基本上变成了一个查找表和一些x截距的最小计算,它更能用GPU完成。你不再需要在多边形上循环了。所以你可以用numpy这样的东西来大量计算这些点,这样你就可以一次做所有的计算,从而提高性能。
这大概是一个稍微不那么优化的C代码版本,它来自于这个页面。
我的c++版本使用std::vector<std::pair<double, double>>和两个double作为x和y。逻辑应该与原始C代码完全相同,但我发现我的更容易阅读。我不能为表演说话。
bool point_in_poly(std::vector<std::pair<double, double>>& verts, double point_x, double point_y)
{
bool in_poly = false;
auto num_verts = verts.size();
for (int i = 0, j = num_verts - 1; i < num_verts; j = i++) {
double x1 = verts[i].first;
double y1 = verts[i].second;
double x2 = verts[j].first;
double y2 = verts[j].second;
if (((y1 > point_y) != (y2 > point_y)) &&
(point_x < (x2 - x1) * (point_y - y1) / (y2 - y1) + x1))
in_poly = !in_poly;
}
return in_poly;
}
原始的C代码是
int pnpoly(int nvert, float *vertx, float *verty, float testx, float testy)
{
int i, j, c = 0;
for (i = 0, j = nvert-1; i < nvert; j = i++) {
if ( ((verty[i]>testy) != (verty[j]>testy)) &&
(testx < (vertx[j]-vertx[i]) * (testy-verty[i]) / (verty[j]-verty[i]) + vertx[i]) )
c = !c;
}
return c;
}
下面是Rust版本的@nirg答案(Philipp Lenssen javascript版本) 我给出这个答案是因为我从这个网站得到了很多帮助,我翻译javascript版本rust作为一个练习,希望可以帮助一些人,最后一个原因是,在我的工作中,我会把这段代码翻译成一个wasm,以提高我的画布的性能,这是一个开始。我的英语很差……,请原谅我 `
pub struct Point {
x: f32,
y: f32,
}
pub fn point_is_in_poly(pt: Point, polygon: &Vec<Point>) -> bool {
let mut is_inside = false;
let max_x = polygon.iter().map(|pt| pt.x).reduce(f32::max).unwrap();
let min_x = polygon.iter().map(|pt| pt.x).reduce(f32::min).unwrap();
let max_y = polygon.iter().map(|pt| pt.y).reduce(f32::max).unwrap();
let min_y = polygon.iter().map(|pt| pt.y).reduce(f32::min).unwrap();
if pt.x < min_x || pt.x > max_x || pt.y < min_y || pt.y > max_y {
return is_inside;
}
let len = polygon.len();
let mut j = len - 1;
for i in 0..len {
let y_i_value = polygon[i].y > pt.y;
let y_j_value = polygon[j].y > pt.y;
let last_check = (polygon[j].x - polygon[i].x) * (pt.y - polygon[i].y)
/ (polygon[j].y - polygon[i].y)
+ polygon[i].x;
if y_i_value != y_j_value && pt.x < last_check {
is_inside = !is_inside;
}
j = i;
}
is_inside
}
let pt = Point {
x: 1266.753,
y: 97.655,
};
let polygon = vec![
Point {
x: 725.278,
y: 203.586,
},
Point {
x: 486.831,
y: 441.931,
},
Point {
x: 905.77,
y: 445.241,
},
Point {
x: 1026.649,
y: 201.931,
},
];
let pt1 = Point {
x: 725.278,
y: 203.586,
};
let pt2 = Point {
x: 872.652,
y: 321.103,
};
println!("{}", point_is_in_poly(pt, &polygon));// false
println!("{}", point_is_in_poly(pt1, &polygon)); // true
println!("{}", point_is_in_poly(pt2, &polygon));// true
`
答案取决于你用的是简单多边形还是复杂多边形。简单多边形不能有任何线段交点。所以它们可以有洞,但线不能交叉。复杂区域可以有直线交点,所以它们可以有重叠的区域,或者只有一点相交的区域。
对于简单多边形,最好的算法是光线投射(交叉数)算法。对于复杂多边形,该算法不检测重叠区域内的点。所以对于复杂多边形你必须使用圈数算法。
下面是一篇用C实现这两种算法的优秀文章。我试过了,效果不错。
http://geomalgorithms.com/a03-_inclusion.html
Like David Segonds' answer suggests I use an approach of angle summation derived from my concave polygon drawing algorithm. It relies of adding up the approximate angles of subtriangles around the point to obtain a weight. A weight around 1.0 means the point is inside the triangle, a weight around 0.0 means outside, a weight around -1.0 is what happens when inside the polygon but in reverse order (like with one of the halves of a bowtie-shaped tetragon) and a weight of NAN if exactly on an edge. The reason it's not slow is that angles don't need to be estimated accurately at all. Holes can be handled by treating them as separate polygons and subtracting the weights.
typedef struct { double x, y; } xy_t;
xy_t sub_xy(xy_t a, xy_t b)
{
a.x -= b.x;
a.y -= b.y;
return a;
}
double calc_sharp_subtriangle_pixel_weight(xy_t p0, xy_t p1)
{
xy_t rot, r0, r1;
double weight;
// Rotate points (unnormalised)
rot = sub_xy(p1, p0);
r0.x = rot.x*p0.y - rot.y*p0.x;
r0.y = rot.x*p0.x + rot.y*p0.y;
r1.y = rot.x*p1.x + rot.y*p1.y;
// Calc weight
weight = subtriangle_angle_approx(r1.y, r0.x) - subtriangle_angle_approx(r0.y, r0.x);
return weight;
}
double calc_sharp_polygon_pixel_weight(xy_t p, xy_t *corner, int corner_count)
{
int i;
xy_t p0, p1;
double weight = 0.;
p0 = sub_xy(corner[corner_count-1], p);
for (i=0; i < corner_count; i++)
{
// Transform corner coordinates
p1 = sub_xy(corner[i], p);
// Calculate weight for each subtriangle
weight += calc_sharp_subtriangle_pixel_weight(p0, p1);
p0 = p1;
}
return weight;
}
因此,对于多边形的每一段,都形成一个子三角形,并计算点,然后旋转每个子三角形以计算其近似角度并添加到权重。
调用subtriangle_angle_approx(y, x)可以替换为atan2(y, x) / (2.*pi),但是一个非常粗略的近似值就足够精确了:
double subtriangle_angle_approx(double y, double x)
{
double angle, d;
int obtuse;
if (x == 0.)
return NAN;
obtuse = fabs(y) > fabs(x);
if (obtuse)
swap_double(&y, &x);
// Core of the approximation, a very loosely approximate atan(y/x) / (2.*pi) over ]-1 , 1[
d = y / x;
angle = 0.13185 * d;
if (obtuse)
angle = sign(d)*0.25 - angle;
return angle;
}
推荐文章
- 确定记录是否存在的最快方法
- 阅读GHC核心
- Python: List vs Dict用于查找表
- 为什么MATLAB的矩阵乘法运算这么快?
- for循环和for-each循环在性能上有区别吗?
- 就性能而言,使用std::memcpy()还是std::copy()更好?
- 什么时候我应该(不)想要在我的代码中使用熊猫apply() ?
- 如何加速gwt编译器?
- MySQL OR与IN性能
- 应该……接住环内还是环外?
- 哪个更快/最好?SELECT *或SELECT columnn1, colum2, column3等
- 加快R中的循环操作
- INT和VARCHAR主键之间有真正的性能差异吗?
- c++标准是否要求iostreams的性能很差,或者我只是在处理一个糟糕的实现?
- 大概的成本访问各种缓存和主存储器?