Why is Firefox 30 times slower than Chrome, when calculating Perlin noise? - javascript

I have written a map generator in javascript, using classical perlin noise scripts I have found in various places, to get the functionality I want. I have been working in chrome, and have not experienced any problems with the map. However, when I tested it in firefox, it was incredibly slow - almost hanging my system. It fared better in the nightly build, but still 30 times slower than Chrome.
You can find a test page of it here:
http://jsfiddle.net/7Gq3s/
Here is the html code:
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<title>PerlinMapTest</title>
</head>
<body>
<canvas id="map" width="100" height="100" style="border: 1px solid red">My Canvas</canvas>
<script src="//code.jquery.com/jquery-2.0.0.min.js"></script>
<script>
$(document).ready(function(){
//Log time in two ways
var startTime = new Date().getTime();
console.time("Map generated in: ");
var canvas = $("#map")[0];
var ctx = canvas.getContext("2d");
var id = ctx.createImageData(canvas.width, canvas.height);
var noiseMap = new PerlinNoise(500);
var startx = 0;
var starty = 0;
var value = 0;
for(var i = startx; i < canvas.width; i++){
for(var j = starty; j < canvas.height; j++){
value = noiseMap.noise(i,j, 0, 42);
value = linear(value,-1,1,0,255);
setPixel(id, i, j, 0,0,0,value);
}
}
ctx.putImageData(id,0,0);
var endTime = new Date().getTime();
console.timeEnd("Map generated in: ");
alert("Map generated in: " + (endTime - startTime) + "milliseconds");
});
function setPixel(imageData, x, y, r, g, b, a) {
index = (x + y * imageData.width) * 4;
imageData.data[index+0] = r;
imageData.data[index+1] = g;
imageData.data[index+2] = b;
imageData.data[index+3] = a;
}
//This is a port of Ken Perlin's "Improved Noise"
//http://mrl.nyu.edu/~perlin/noise/
//Originally from http://therandomuniverse.blogspot.com/2007/01/perlin-noise-your-new-best-friend.html
//but the site appears to be down, so here is a mirror of it
//Converted from php to javascript by Christian Moe
//Patched the errors with code from here: http://asserttrue.blogspot.fi/2011/12/perlin-noise-in-javascript_31.html
var PerlinNoise = function(seed) {
this._default_size = 64;
this.seed = seed;
//Initialize the permutation array.
this.p = new Array(512);
this.permutation = [ 151,160,137,91,90,15,
131,13,201,95,96,53,194,233,7,225,140,36,103,30,69,142,8,99,37,240,21,10,23,
190, 6,148,247,120,234,75,0,26,197,62,94,252,219,203,117,35,11,32,57,177,33,
88,237,149,56,87,174,20,125,136,171,168, 68,175,74,165,71,134,139,48,27,166,
77,146,158,231,83,111,229,122,60,211,133,230,220,105,92,41,55,46,245,40,244,
102,143,54, 65,25,63,161, 1,216,80,73,209,76,132,187,208, 89,18,169,200,196,
135,130,116,188,159,86,164,100,109,198,173,186, 3,64,52,217,226,250,124,123,
5,202,38,147,118,126,255,82,85,212,207,206,59,227,47,16,58,17,182,189,28,42,
223,183,170,213,119,248,152, 2,44,154,163, 70,221,153,101,155,167, 43,172,9,
129,22,39,253, 19,98,108,110,79,113,224,232,178,185, 112,104,218,246,97,228,
251,34,242,193,238,210,144,12,191,179,162,241, 81,51,145,235,249,14,239,107,
49,192,214, 31,181,199,106,157,184, 84,204,176,115,121,50,45,127, 4,150,254,
138,236,205,93,222,114,67,29,24,72,243,141,128,195,78,66,215,61,156,180
];
for (var i=0; i < 256 ; i++) {
this.p[256+i] = this.p[i] = this.permutation[i];
}
};
PerlinNoise.prototype.noise = function(x,y,z,size) {
if (size == undefined)
{
size = this._default_size;
}
//Set the initial value and initial size
var value = 0.0;
var initialSize = size;
//Add finer and finer hues of smoothed noise together
while(size >= 1)
{
value += this.smoothNoise(x / size, y / size, z / size) * size;
size /= 2.0;
}
//Return the result over the initial size
return value / initialSize;
};
//This function determines what cube the point passed resides in
//and determines its value.
PerlinNoise.prototype.smoothNoise = function(x, y, z){
//Offset each coordinate by the seed value
x += this.seed;
y += this.seed;
z += this.seed;
var orig_x = x;
var orig_y = y;
var orig_z = z;
var X = Math.floor(x) & 255, // FIND UNIT CUBE THAT
Y = Math.floor(y) & 255, // CONTAINS POINT.
Z = Math.floor(z) & 255;
x -= Math.floor(x); // FIND RELATIVE X,Y,Z
y -= Math.floor(y); // OF POINT IN CUBE.
z -= Math.floor(z);
var u = this.fade(x), // COMPUTE FADE CURVES
v = this.fade(y), // FOR EACH OF X,Y,Z.
w = this.fade(z);
var A = this.p[X ]+Y, AA = this.p[A]+Z, AB = this.p[A+1]+Z, // HASH COORDINATES OF
B = this.p[X+1]+Y, BA = this.p[B]+Z, BB = this.p[B+1]+Z; // THE 8 CUBE CORNERS,
return this.lerp(w, this.lerp(v, this.lerp(u, this.grad(this.p[AA ], x , y , z ), // AND ADD
this.grad(this.p[BA ], x-1, y , z )), // BLENDED
this.lerp(u, this.grad(this.p[AB ], x , y-1, z ), // RESULTS
this.grad(this.p[BB ], x-1, y-1, z ))),// FROM 8
this.lerp(v, this.lerp(u, this.grad(this.p[AA+1], x , y , z-1 ), // CORNERS
this.grad(this.p[BA+1], x-1, y , z-1 )), // OF CUBE
this.lerp(u, this.grad(this.p[AB+1], x , y-1, z-1 ),
this.grad(this.p[BB+1], x-1, y-1, z-1 ))));
};
PerlinNoise.prototype.fade = function(t) {
return t * t * t * ( ( t * ( (t * 6) - 15) ) + 10);
};
PerlinNoise.prototype.lerp = function(t, a, b) {
//Make a weighted interpolaton between points
return a + t * (b - a);
};
PerlinNoise.prototype.grad = function(hash, x, y, z) {
h = hash & 15; // CONVERT LO 4 BITS OF HASH CODE
u = h<8 ? x : y; // INTO 12 GRADIENT DIRECTIONS.
v = h<4 ? y : (h==12||h==14 ? x : z);
return ((h&1) == 0 ? u : -u) + ((h&2) == 0 ? v : -v);
};
PerlinNoise.prototype.scale = function(n) {
return (1 + n)/2;
};
function linear(int, s1, s2, t1, t2)
{
t = [t1, t2];
s = [s1, s2];
rangeS = s1 - s2;
rangeT = t1 - t2;
if((s1 < s2 && t1 > t2) || (s1>s2 && t1<t2))
{
interpolated = ((int - s1) / rangeS*rangeT) + t1;
}
else
{
interpolated = ((int - s1) / rangeS)*rangeT + t1;
}
if(interpolated > Math.max.apply(Math, t))
{
interpolated = Math.max.apply(Math, t);
}
if(interpolated < Math.min.apply(Math, t))
{
interpolated = Math.min.apply(Math, t);
}
return interpolated;
}
</script>
</body>
</html>
I get 33 ms on Chrome, and 1051ms on Firefox 24 Nightly
The results are inconsistent though. Sometimes the Nightly results is as fast as chrome...
Do you know why there is so much variation in this particular instance?
I don't know enough about the theory of perlin noise to try optimizing the code, so don't know what to do.

I have found the culprit. The slowdown occurs when I have Firebug enabled. That extension must weigh it down.

Related

Calculate volume of FOV and loop inside

I want to improve performances in my game and for that, I need to loop inside the visible volume.
I know that this is very slow to calculate, but I really think that it'll be better that today.
I have these values:
Camera position: x, y, z
Camera rotation: rx, ry, rz
Render distance: d
Render function: r
I've tried this code but r is never executed:
const MAP_LIMIT = [150,25,150]; // Limit of the map (x,y,z)
(x=0,y=0,z=0,d=10,ox=0,oy=0,oz=0,r) => {
x = Int(x); // Int = Math.round
y = Int(y);
z = Int(z);
const RoundToMapLimit = (n=0,t=0) => n <= 0 ? 0 : (n >= MAP_LIMIT[t] ? MAP_LIMIT[t] : n);
const obj = new THREE.Object3D();
obj.position.set(x,y,z);
obj.rotation.set(ox,0,0);
obj.translateX(d);
const xRange = [RoundToMapLimit(x),RoundToMapLimit(obj.position.x)];
obj.translateX(-d);
obj.rotation.set(0,oy,0);
obj.translateY(d);
const yRange = [RoundToMapLimit(y,1),RoundToMapLimit(obj.position.y,1)];
obj.translateY(-d);
obj.rotation.set(0,0,oz);
obj.translateZ(d);
const zRange = [RoundToMapLimit(z,2),RoundToMapLimit(obj.position.z,2)];
for (let y2 = Math.min(...yRange); y2 < Math.max(...yRange); ++y2) {
for (let x2 = Math.min(...xRange); x2 < Math.max(...xRange); ++x2) {
for (let z2 = Math.min(...zRange); z2 < Math.max(...zRange); ++z2) {
r([x2,y2,z2]);
}
}
}
};
Can you please help me to fix this function ?
Thank you

Color quantization using euclidean distance gives jumpy results

I'm working on an art project which converts pixels of live video feed into corporate logos based on the distance (in RGB) between the colors of the two. While this functions, it gives a jittery result. Seem like some points in the color space teeter in a sort of superposition between two "closest" points. I'm attempting a sort of naive clustering solution right now because I believe any proper one will be too slow for live video. I'm wondering if anyone has any good ideas to solve this problem? I'll include my code and an example of the result. Thank you!
(imgs array is the logos)
current result: https://gifyu.com/image/fk2y
function distance(r1, g1, b1, bright1, r2, g2, b2, bright2) {
d =
((r2 - r1) * 0.3) ** 2 +
((g2 - g1) * 0.59) ** 2 +
((b2 - b1) * 0.11) ** 2 +
((bright2 - bright1) * 0.75) ** 2;
return Math.round(d);
}
function draw() {
if (x > 100 && z == true) {
video.loadPixels();
for (var y = 0; y < video.height; y++) {
for (var x = 0; x < video.width; x++) {
var index = (video.width - x - 1 + y * video.width) * 4;
var r = video.pixels[index];
var g = video.pixels[index + 1];
var b = video.pixels[index + 2];
var bright = (r + g + b) / 3;
let least = 9999999;
for (var i = 0; i < imgs.length; i++) {
if (
distance(
imgs[i].r,
imgs[i].g,
imgs[i].b,
imgs[i].bright,
r,
g,
b,
bright
) < least
) {
least = distance(
imgs[i].r,
imgs[i].g,
imgs[i].b,
imgs[i].bright,
r,
g,
b,
bright
);
place = imgs[i].img;
}
}
image(place, round(x * vScale), y * vScale, vScale, vScale);
}
}
}
}

What does the MDN web worker "About thread safety" example want to tell us?

I want to use web worker in my code, and to avoid subtle problems, I read this section of MDN.
MDN states the code below is "of a catastrophy", so I guess the codes will cause some strange behaviors impalpablely.
The codes intends to create a canvas, whose content comes from a web worker. The web worker generates the image data in 60FPS and post a message contains the image data to main.js. But MDN doesn't explain what exactly problem will occur, so I have to guess.
The screen can't be refreshed in 60FPS, say if 50FPS, because of the context.putImageData(imageData); takes a little longer time if drawing a retina screen, the posted message from web worker cannot get a in time response, so the posted message will be accumulated to cause the main screen locking or no response?
If the "Data passed between the main page and workers is copied, not shared.", would the situation in 1 means serious memory leak?
... Needs your help to point problems.
Vise versa, if the code is written as main.js calls the data from web worker, for example postMessage to web worker to query, but in very high frequency, and the algorithm in web worker would take relatively long time, cannot response in time to main.js, what would happen?
Or my understanding is wrong, the problems the codes want to demonstrate are totally different.
Needs your help. Thanks in advance.
HTML Content
<html>
<head>
<title>Multithreading Catastrophy</title>
<style>
body { margin: 0px; }
canvas { position: absolute; top: 0; bottom: 0; left: 0; right:0; width: 100%; height: 100%; }
</style>
<script src="main.js" async></script>
</head>
<body>
<canvas id="canvas"></canvas>
</body>
</html>
main.js Content
// main.js
var myworker = new Worker("worker.js"), width=window.innerWidth, height=window.innerHeight, context=document.getElementById('canvas').getContext('2d');
var imagedatatmp=context.createImageData(width,height);
myworker.onmessage = function(data){
imageData = imagedatatmp.from(data);
};
setTimeout(function draw_canvas() {
context.putImageData(imageData);
setTimeout(draw_canvas, 1000/60);
},10);
window.onresize = window.reload; // Quick (to type) n' dirty way to resize;
worker.js Content
// worker.js
window.onmessage = function(width, height){
var noise = function(x, y, z) {
var p = new Array(512), permutation = [151,160,137,91,90,15,131,13,201,95,96,53,194,233,7,225,140,36,103,30,69,142,8,99,37,240,21,10,23,190, 6,148,247,120,234,75,0,26,197,62,94,252,219,203,117,35,11,32,57,177,33,88,237,149,56,87,174,20,125,136,171,168, 68,175,74,165,71,134,139,48,27,166,77,146,158,231,83,111,229,122,60,211,133,230,220,105,92,41,55,46,245,40,244,102,143,54, 65,25,63,161, 1,216,80,73,209,76,132,187,208, 89,18,169,200,196,135,130,116,188,159,86,164,100,109,198,173,186, 3,64,52,217,226,250,124,123,5,202,38,147,118,126,255,82,85,212,207,206,59,227,47,16,58,17,182,189,28,42,223,183,170,213,119,248,152, 2,44,154,163, 70,221,153,101,155,167, 43,172,9,129,22,39,253, 19,98,108,110,79,113,224,232,178,185, 112,104,218,246,97,228,251,34,242,193,238,210,144,12,191,179,162,241, 81,51,145,235,249,14,239,107,49,192,214, 31,181,199,106,157,184, 84,204,176,115,121,50,45,127, 4,150,254,138,236,205,93,222,114,67,29,24,72,243,141,128,195,78,66,215,61,156,180];
for (var i = 0;i < 256;i++) p[256 + i] = p[i] = permutation[i];
var X = Math.floor(x) & 255, Y = Math.floor(y) & 255, Z = Math.floor(z) & 255; x -= Math.floor(x), y -= Math.floor(y), z -= Math.floor(z);
var u = fade(x), v = fade(y), w = fade(z);
var A = p[X] + Y, AA = p[A] + Z, AB = p[A + 1] + Z, B = p[X + 1] + Y, BA = p[B] + Z, BB = p[B + 1] + Z;
return scale(lerp(w, lerp(v, lerp(u, grad(p[AA], x, y, z), grad(p[BA], x - 1, y, z)), lerp(u, grad(p[AB], x, y - 1, z), grad(p[BB], x - 1, y - 1, z))), lerp(v, lerp(u, grad(p[AA + 1], x, y, z - 1), grad(p[BA + 1], x - 1, y, z - 1)), lerp(u, grad(p[AB + 1], x, y - 1, z - 1), grad(p[BB + 1], x - 1, y - 1, z - 1)))));
};
function fade(t) { return t * t * t * (t * (t * 6 - 15) + 10); }
function lerp(t, a, b) { return a + t * (b - a); }
function grad(hash, x, y, z) {
var h = hash & 15; var u = h < 8 ? x : y, v = h < 4 ? y : h == 12 || h == 14 ? x : z;
return ((h & 1) == 0 ? u : -u) + ((h & 2) == 0 ? v : -v);
}
function scale(n) { return (1 + n) / 2; }
var length = width*height; var canvasnoisedata=new UInt32Array(length);
setTimeout(function make_noise() {
var i=length, z=Math.random()*1024;
while ( i-- ) {
canvasnoisedata[i] = noise(i%width+z,i/width+z,z);
}
setTimeout(make_noise, 1000/60);
},1000/60);
setTimeout(function post_noise() {
postMessage( canvasnoisedata );
setTimeout(post_noise, 1000/60);
},1000/60);
};

How to plot the graph based on equation using js

I need to plot a graph in a canvas. But how can I use an algebra equation as input, and based on the equation, draw the curve, using javascript?
For example:
x2+5y=250
The equation plots a graph with both positive and negative values.
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<title>Interactive Line Graph</title>
<script src="http://ajax.aspnetcdn.com/ajax/jQuery/jquery-1.6.1.min.js"></script>
<script>
var graph;
var xPadding = 30;
var yPadding = 30;
var data = { values:[
{ X: "1", Y: 15 },
{ X: "2", Y: 35 },
{ X: "3", Y: 60 },
{ X: "4", Y: 14 },
{ X: "5", Y: 20 },
{ X: "6", Y: 95 },
]};
// Returns the max Y value in our data list
function getMaxY() {
var max = 0;
for(var i = 0; i < data.values.length; i ++) {
if(data.values[i].Y > max) {
max = data.values[i].Y;
}
}
max += 10 - max % 10;
return max;
}
// Return the x pixel for a graph point
function getXPixel(val) {
return ((graph.width() - xPadding) / data.values.length) * val + (xPadding * 1.5);
}
// Return the y pixel for a graph point
function getYPixel(val) {
return graph.height() - (((graph.height() - yPadding) / getMaxY()) * val) - yPadding;
}
$(document).ready(function() {
graph = $('#graph');
var c = graph[0].getContext('2d');
c.lineWidth = 2;
c.strokeStyle = '#333';
c.font = 'italic 8pt sans-serif';
c.textAlign = "center";
// Draw the axises
c.beginPath();
c.moveTo(xPadding, 0);
c.lineTo(xPadding, graph.height() - yPadding);
c.lineTo(graph.width(), graph.height() - yPadding);
c.stroke();
// Draw the X value texts
for(var i = 0; i < data.values.length; i ++) {
c.fillText(data.values[i].X, getXPixel(i), graph.height() - yPadding + 20);
}
// Draw the Y value texts
c.textAlign = "right"
c.textBaseline = "middle";
for(var i = 0; i < getMaxY(); i += 10) {
c.fillText(i, xPadding - 10, getYPixel(i));
}
c.strokeStyle = '#f00';
// Draw the line graph
c.beginPath();
c.moveTo(getXPixel(0), getYPixel(data.values[0].Y));
for(var i = 1; i < data.values.length; i ++) {
c.lineTo(getXPixel(i), getYPixel(data.values[i].Y));
}
c.stroke();
// Draw the dots
c.fillStyle = '#333';
for(var i = 0; i < data.values.length; i ++) {
c.beginPath();
c.arc(getXPixel(i), getYPixel(data.values[i].Y), 4, 0, Math.PI * 2, true);
c.fill();
}
});
</script>
</head>
<body>
<canvas id="graph" width="200" height="150">
</canvas>
</body>
</html>
[i am add one example ploter in math.js ] i want to how to full screen plot the graph and mouse are cilck in graph any point to show the details in x&y value.so how to change please help me.
Parsing linear equation.
Or maybe it is the Parsing of the equation that the question is about.
This answer shows how to parse a simple linear equation.
User inputs x2+5y=230 and you need to solve and plot for y for f(x) which would be the function function(x) { return (3 * x -230) / -5; }
Will assume the equation is always in the same form with x and y and some scalars and constants scalar * x + const + scalar * y = const
Define the rules
Rules
Only x and y will be considered variables.
A term is a scalar and a variable 2x or a constant +1.
All additional characters will be ignored including *,/,%
Numbers can have decimal places. Valid numbers 1 +1 0.2 -2 10e5
Scalars must be adjacent to variables 3y2 becomes 6y 3y-2 stays as is.
Parsing
To parse a equation we must break it down into unambiguous easy to manipulate units. In this case a unit I call a term and will have 3 properties.
scalar A number
variable the name of the variable x,y or null for constants
side which side of the equation the term is Left or right
An example equation
2x + 2 + 3y = 4x - 1y
First parsed to create
terms
// shorthand not code
{2,x,true; // true is for left
{2,null,true; // null is a constant
{3,y,true;
{4,x,false;
{-1,y,false;
Once all the terms are parsed then the equation is solved by summing all the terms for x, y and constants and moving everything to the left flipping the sign of any values on the right.
sumX = 2 + -4; //as 4x is on the right it becomes negative
sumY = 3 + 1;
const = 2;
Making the equation
-2x + 4y + 2 = 0
Then move the y out to the right and divide the left by its scalar.
-2x + 2 = 4y
(-2x + 2)/-4 = y
The result is a function that we can call from javascript will the value of x and get the value of y.
function(x){ return (-2 * x + 2) / 4; }
The Parser
The following function parses and returns a function for input equation for x. That function then use to plot the points in the demo below.
function parseEquation(input){
// Important that white spaces are removed first
input = input.replace(/\s+/g,""); // remove whitespaces
input = input.replace(/([\-\+])([xy])/g,"$11$2"); // convert -x -y or +x +y to -1x -1y or +1x +1y
// just to make the logic below a little simpler
var newTerm = () => {term = { val : null, scalar : 1, left : left, };} // create a new term
var pushTerm = () => {terms.push(term); term = null;} // push term and null current
// regExp [xy=] gets "x","y", or "="" or [\-\+]??[0-9\.]+ gets +- number with decimal
var reg =/[xy=]|[\-\+]??[0-9\.eE]+/g; // regExp to split the input string into parts
var parts = input.match(reg); // get all the parts of the equation
var terms = []; // an array of all terms parsed
var term = null; // Numbers as constants and variables with scalars are terms
var left = true; // which side of equation a term is
parts.forEach( p=> {
if (p === "x" || p === "y") {
if (term !== null && term.val !== null) { // is the variable defined
pushTerm(); // yes so push to the stack and null
}
if (term === null) { newTerm(); } // do we need a new term?
term.val = p;
} else if( p === "=") { // is it the equals sign
if (!left) { throw new SyntaxError("Unxpected `=` in equation."); }
if (term === null) { throw new SyntaxError("No left hand side of equation."); }// make sure that there is a left side
terms.push(term); // push the last left side term onto the stack
term = null;
left = false; // everything on the right from here on in
} else { // all that is left are numbers (we hope)
if (isNaN(p)){ throw new SyntaxError("Unknown value '"+p+"' in equation"); }//check that there is a number
if (term !== null && (p[0] === "+" || p[0] === "-")) { // check if number is a new term
pushTerm(); // yes so push to the stack and null
}
if (term === null) { newTerm(); } // do we need a new term?
term.scalar *= Number(p); // set the scalar to the new value
}
});
if (term !== null) { // there may or may not be a term left to push to the stack
pushTerm();
}
// now simplify the equation getting the scalar for left and right sides . x on left y on right
var scalarX = 0;
var scalarY = 0
var valC = 0; // any constants
terms.forEach(t => {
t.scalar *= !t.left ? -1 : 1; // everything on right is negative
if (t.val === "y") {
scalarY += -t.scalar; // reverse sign
} else if (t.val === "x") {
scalarX += t.scalar;
} else {
valC += t.scalar;
}
})
// now build the code string for the equation to solve for x and return y
var code = "return (" + scalarX + " * x + (" + valC + ")) / "+scalarY +";\n";
var equation = new Function("x",code); // create the function
return equation;
}
The following usage examples are all the same equation
var equation = parseEquation("x2+5y+x=230");
var y = equation(10); // get y for x = 10;
equation = parseEquation("x2+x=230-5y");
equation = parseEquation("x2+x-30=200-2y-3y");
equation = parseEquation("200- 2y-3y = x2+x-30");
equation = parseEquation("200-2y- 3y - x2-x+30=0");
equation = parseEquation("100.0 + 100-2y- 3y - x2-x+30=0");
equation = parseEquation("1e2 + 10E1-2y- 3y - x2-x+30=0");
Demo
I have added it to the code in the answer markE has already given. (hope you don't mind markE)
function plot(equation) {
var graph;
var xPadding = 30;
var yPadding = 30;
var data = {
values : [{
X : "1",
Y : 15
}, {
X : "2",
Y : 35
}, {
X : "3",
Y : 60
}, {
X : "4",
Y : 14
}, {
X : "5",
Y : 20
}, {
X : "6",
Y : -30
},
]
};
// Returns the max Y value in our data list
function getMaxY() {
var max = 0;
for (var i = 0; i < data.values.length; i++) {
if (data.values[i].Y > max) {
max = data.values[i].Y;
}
}
max += 10 - max % 10;
return max;
}
var scaleA = 1.4;
// Return the x pixel for a graph point
function getXPixel(val) {
return ((graph.width() / scaleA - xPadding) / data.values.length) * val + (xPadding * 1.5);
}
// Return the y pixel for a graph point
function getYPixel(val) {
return graph.height() / scaleA - (((graph.height() / scaleA - yPadding) / getMaxY()) * val) - yPadding;
}
graph = $('#graph');
var c = graph[0].getContext('2d');
c.clearRect(0,0,graph[0].width,graph[0].height);
c.lineWidth = 2;
c.strokeStyle = '#333';
c.font = 'italic 8pt sans-serif';
c.textAlign = "center";
// Draw the axises
c.beginPath();
c.moveTo(xPadding, 0);
c.lineTo(xPadding, graph.height() / scaleA - yPadding);
c.lineTo(graph.width(), graph.height() / scaleA - yPadding);
c.stroke();
// Draw the X value texts
for (var i = 0; i < data.values.length; i++) {
c.fillText(data.values[i].X, getXPixel(i), graph.height() / scaleA - yPadding + 20);
}
// Draw the Y value texts
c.textAlign = "right"
c.textBaseline = "middle";
for (var i = 0; i < getMaxY(); i += 10) {
c.fillText(i, xPadding - 10, getYPixel(i));
}
c.strokeStyle = '#f00';
// Draw the line graph
c.beginPath();
c.moveTo(getXPixel(0), getYPixel(equation(0)));
for (var i = 1; i < data.values.length; i++) {
c.lineTo(getXPixel(i), getYPixel(equation(i)));
}
c.stroke();
// Draw the dots
c.fillStyle = '#333';
for (var i = 0; i < data.values.length; i++) {
c.beginPath();
c.arc(getXPixel(i), getYPixel(equation(i)), 4, 0, Math.PI * 2, true);
c.fill();
}
}
var codeText = "";
function parseEquation(input){
// Important that white spaces are removed first
input = input.replace(/\s+/g,""); // remove whitespaces
input = input.replace(/([\-\+])([xy])/g,"$11$2"); // convert -x -y or +x +y to -1x -1y or +1x +1y
// just to make the logic below a little simpler
var newTerm = () => {term = { val : null, scalar : 1, left : left, };} // create a new term
var pushTerm = () => {terms.push(term); term = null;} // push term and null current
// regExp [xy=] gets "x","y", or "="" or [\-\+]??[0-9\.]+ gets +- number with decimal
var reg =/[xy=]|[\-\+]??[0-9\.eE]+/g; // regExp to split the input string into parts
var parts = input.match(reg); // get all the parts of the equation
var terms = []; // an array of all terms parsed
var term = null; // Numbers as constants and variables with scalars are terms
var left = true; // which side of equation a term is
parts.forEach(p=>{
if (p === "x" || p === "y") {
if (term !== null && term.val !== null) { // is the variable defined
pushTerm(); // yes so push to the stack and null
}
if (term === null) { newTerm(); } // do we need a new term?
term.val = p;
} else if( p === "="){ // is it the equals sign
if (!left) { throw new SyntaxError("Unxpected `=` in equation."); }
if (term === null) { throw new SyntaxError("No left hand side of equation."); }// make sure that there is a left side
terms.push(term); // push the last left side term onto the stack
term = null;
left = false; // everything on the right from here on in
} else { // all that is left are numbers (we hope)
if (isNaN(p)){ throw new SyntaxError("Unknown value '"+p+"' in equation"); }//check that there is a number
if (term !== null && (p[0] === "+" || p[0] === "-")){ // check if number is a new term
pushTerm(); // yes so push to the stack and null
}
if(term === null){ newTerm(); } // do we need a new term?
term.scalar *= Number(p); // set the scalar to the new value
}
});
if(term !== null){// there may or may not be a term left to push to the stack
pushTerm();
}
// now simplify the equation getting the scalar for left and right sides . x on left y on right
var scalarX = 0;
var scalarY = 0
var valC = 0; // any constants
terms.forEach(t => {
t.scalar *= !t.left ? -1 : 1; // everything on right is negative
if (t.val === "y") {
scalarY += -t.scalar; // reverse sign
} else if (t.val === "x") {
scalarX += t.scalar;
} else {
valC += t.scalar;
}
})
// now build the code string for the equation to solve for x and return y
var code = "return (" + scalarX + " * x + (" + valC + ")) / "+scalarY +";\n";
codeText = code;
var equation = new Function("x",code); // create the function
return equation;
}
function parseAndPlot(){
var input = eqInput.value;
try{
var equation = parseEquation(input);
plot(equation);
error.textContent ="Plot of "+input+ " as 'function(x){ "+codeText+"}'";
}catch(e){
error.textContent = "Error parsing equation. " + e.message;
}
}
var button = document.getElementById("plot");
var eqInput = document.getElementById("equation-text");
var error = document.getElementById("status");
button.addEventListener("click",parseAndPlot);
parseAndPlot();
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.9.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<canvas id="graph" width="200" height="150"></canvas> <br>
Enter a linear equation : <input id="equation-text" value="x2 + 5y = 250" type="text"></input><input id="plot" value="plot" type=button></input><div id="status"></div>
I think I understand what you're asking...
Your existing code automatically puts your y-axis at the bottom of the canvas so negative y-values will be off-canvas.
Quick solution
The quickest solution is to divide graph.height()/2 so that your graph has it's y-axis near center-canvas. This leaves room for negative values.
Better solution
The better solution is to redesign your graphing system to allow for solutions in all axis directions.
Refactored code showing the quick solution:
I leave it to you to extend the y-axis labels in the negative direction (if desired)
var graph;
var xPadding = 30;
var yPadding = 30;
var data = { values:[
{ X: "1", Y: 15 },
{ X: "2", Y: 35 },
{ X: "3", Y: 60 },
{ X: "4", Y: 14 },
{ X: "5", Y: 20 },
{ X: "6", Y: -30 },
]};
// Returns the max Y value in our data list
function getMaxY() {
var max = 0;
for(var i = 0; i < data.values.length; i ++) {
if(data.values[i].Y > max) {
max = data.values[i].Y;
}
}
max += 10 - max % 10;
return max;
}
// Return the x pixel for a graph point
function getXPixel(val) {
return ((graph.width()/2 - xPadding) / data.values.length) * val + (xPadding * 1.5);
}
// Return the y pixel for a graph point
function getYPixel(val) {
return graph.height()/2 - (((graph.height()/2 - yPadding) / getMaxY()) * val) - yPadding;
}
graph = $('#graph');
var c = graph[0].getContext('2d');
c.lineWidth = 2;
c.strokeStyle = '#333';
c.font = 'italic 8pt sans-serif';
c.textAlign = "center";
// Draw the axises
c.beginPath();
c.moveTo(xPadding, 0);
c.lineTo(xPadding, graph.height()/2 - yPadding);
c.lineTo(graph.width(), graph.height()/2 - yPadding);
c.stroke();
// Draw the X value texts
for(var i = 0; i < data.values.length; i ++) {
c.fillText(data.values[i].X, getXPixel(i), graph.height()/2 - yPadding + 20);
}
// Draw the Y value texts
c.textAlign = "right"
c.textBaseline = "middle";
for(var i = 0; i < getMaxY(); i += 10) {
c.fillText(i, xPadding - 10, getYPixel(i));
}
c.strokeStyle = '#f00';
// Draw the line graph
c.beginPath();
c.moveTo(getXPixel(0), getYPixel(data.values[0].Y));
for(var i = 1; i < data.values.length; i ++) {
c.lineTo(getXPixel(i), getYPixel(data.values[i].Y));
}
c.stroke();
// Draw the dots
c.fillStyle = '#333';
for(var i = 0; i < data.values.length; i ++) {
c.beginPath();
c.arc(getXPixel(i), getYPixel(data.values[i].Y), 4, 0, Math.PI * 2, true);
c.fill();
}
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.9.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<canvas id="graph" width="200" height="300"></canvas>

Are two triangles similar?

As a part time project I am working on some geometry utilities and have come across a relatively simple question that seems to have a not so simple solution.
The problem involves EPSILON being too small for the problem. To see if two triangle are similar I workout the 3 interior angles in the form of their cosines for each triangle and then sort them. I then test Math.abs(t1[0]-t2[0]) < EPSILON where t1 is the one triangle and t2 the other each containing the three angles.
I am getting about a 20% - 80% failure rate on triangles I know to be similar. When I bring EPSILON to a larger value, for example still a very small 0.0000001 there is no failure ( well not in the time I have let the tests run).
Below is the extracted relevant triangle function and I have also included the testing code as a demo below that. Click the button and its runs tests and shows the results. The triangles are randomly generated. Every so often two similar triangle are created of which about half are exact copies and the rest are a copy but scaled, mirrored, rotated and vec order shuffled while still maintaining the similarity
I would like to know how to calculate a reasonable EPSILON that will reduce the incorrect results but keep the system as accurate as possible?
Though there is also the possibility that there is another error in the test code which I will continue to check.
const EPSILON = Number.EPSILON
function Triangle(p1,p2,p3){
this.p1 = p1;
this.p2 = p2;
this.p3 = p3;
}
Triangle.prototype.p1 = undefined;
Triangle.prototype.p2 = undefined;
Triangle.prototype.p3 = undefined;
Triangle.prototype.isSimilar = function(triangle){
var a1,b1,c1,a2,b2,c2,aa1,bb1,cc1,aa2,bb2,cc2; //
var t1 = [];
var t2 = [];
var sortF = function(a,b){ return a-b };
// get the length squared and length of each side
a1 = Math.sqrt(aa1 = Math.pow(this.p1.x - this.p2.x, 2) + Math.pow(this.p1.y - this.p2.y, 2));
b1 = Math.sqrt(bb1 = Math.pow(this.p2.x - this.p3.x, 2) + Math.pow(this.p2.y - this.p3.y, 2));
c1 = Math.sqrt(cc1 = Math.pow(this.p3.x - this.p1.x, 2) + Math.pow(this.p3.y - this.p1.y, 2));
a2 = Math.sqrt(aa2 = Math.pow(triangle.p1.x - triangle.p2.x, 2) + Math.pow(triangle.p1.y - triangle.p2.y, 2));
b2 = Math.sqrt(bb2 = Math.pow(triangle.p2.x - triangle.p3.x, 2) + Math.pow(triangle.p2.y - triangle.p3.y, 2));
c2 = Math.sqrt(cc2 = Math.pow(triangle.p3.x - triangle.p1.x, 2) + Math.pow(triangle.p3.y - triangle.p1.y, 2));
// get the cosin of each angle for both triangle
t1[0] = (cc1 - (aa1 + bb1)) / (-2 * a1 * b1);
t1[1] = (aa1 - (cc1 + bb1)) / (-2 * c1 * b1);
t1[2] = (bb1 - (cc1 + aa1)) / (-2 * c1 * a1);
t2[0] = (cc2 - (aa2 + bb2)) / (-2 * a2 * b2);
t2[1] = (aa2 - (cc2 + bb2)) / (-2 * c2 * b2);
t2[2] = (bb2 - (cc2 + aa2)) / (-2 * c2 * a2);
t1.sort(sortF);
t2.sort(sortF);
if(Math.abs(t1[0] - t2[0]) < EPSILON && Math.abs(t1[1] - t2[1]) < EPSILON && Math.abs(t1[2] - t2[2]) < EPSILON){
return true;
}
return false;
}
function Vec(x,y){
this.x = x;
this.y = y;
}
Vec.prototype.x = undefined;
Vec.prototype.y = undefined;
UPDATE
Some more information.
Failed similar triangle using cosine of angles EPSILON : 2.220446049250313e-16
Failed Triangles ID : 94
Method : compare cosine of angles
Both Compare T1 to T2 and T2 to T1 failed
Both Triangles known to be similare
Triangle 1
p1.x = -149241116087155.97;
p1.y = -1510074922190599.8;
p2.x = -2065214078816255.8;
p2.y = 6756872141691895;
p3.x = -7125027429739231;
p3.y = -5622578541875555;
Triangle 2
p1.x = -307440480802857.2;
p1.y = -404929352172871.56;
p2.x = -3020163594243123;
p2.y = -355583557775981.75;
p3.x = 595422457974710.8;
p3.y = 2291176238828451.5;
Compare T1 to T2 Result : false
Computed values
Triangle 1 length of side and square length
length a : 8486068945686473 squared : 7.201336615094433e+31
length b : 13373575078230092 squared : 1.78852510373057e+32
length c : 8097794805726894 squared : 6.557428071565746e+31
Unsorted cosines C is angle opposite side c
cosine C : 0.8163410767815653
cosine A : 0.7960251614312384
cosine B : -0.30024590551189423
ratio a : undefined
ratio b : undefined
ratio c : undefined
Triangle2
length a : 2713171888697380.5 squared : 7.36130169761771e+30
length b : 4480825808030667.5 squared : 2.0077799921913682e+31
length c : 2843263414467020.5 squared : 8.08414684404666e+30
Unsorted cosines C is angle opposite side c
cosine C : 0.7960251614312384
cosine A : 0.8163410767815651
cosine B : -0.3002459055118942
Compare T2 to T1 Result : false
Triangle1
Computed values
Triangle 1 length of side and square length
length a : 2713171888697380.5 squared : 7.36130169761771e+30
length b : 4480825808030667.5 squared : 2.0077799921913682e+31
length c : 2843263414467020.5 squared : 8.08414684404666e+30
Unsorted cosines C is angle opposite side c
cosine a : 0.7960251614312384
cosine b : 0.8163410767815651
cosine c : -0.3002459055118942
ratio a : undefined
ratio b : undefined
ratio c : undefined
Triangle2
length a : 8486068945686473 squared : 7.201336615094433e+31
length b : 13373575078230092 squared : 1.78852510373057e+32
length c : 8097794805726894 squared : 6.557428071565746e+31
cosine a : 0.8163410767815653
cosine b : 0.7960251614312384
cosine c : -0.30024590551189423
UPDATE 2
Results output and a bug fix (apologies #lhf I did not sqrt epsilon I was still using the original constant)
This shows the results of tests on the same set of triangles. Inconsistency means that comparing triangle 1 to triangle 2 is a different result than triangle 2 to 1. Incorrect Means that two known similar triangles failed and Incorrect Inconsistency means that two known similar triangle failed one test and passed the other.
Using the ratios of lengths gave the worst result but using cosine was not much better apart from the Incorrect Inconsistency similar triangles which had a very high rate of inconsistency between compare t1 to t2 and t2 to t1 using the ratio of length. But that makes sense are the magnitude of the ratios will vary greatly depending on which order the test is done.
As you can see using the square root of EPSILON completely eliminated the error for both methods.
If lhf wishes to put the sqrt(epsilon) comment as an answer I will accept that as an answer. And thanks to everyone for their input and I have some further reading thanks to Salix
======================================
Default EPSILON : 2.220446049250313e-16
======================================
Via cosine of angles
All Inconsistency failed : 0 of 10000
Similar Incorrect failed : 1924 of 5032
Similar Incorrect Inconsistency failed : 0 of 5032
======================================
Via ratio of lengths
All Inconsistency failed : 1532 of 10000
Similar Incorrect failed : 2082 of 5032
Similar Incorrect Inconsistency failed : 1532 of 5032
======================================
Squaring EPSILON : 1.4901161193847656e-8
======================================
Via cosine of angles
All Inconsistency failed : 0 of 10000
Similar Incorrect failed : 0 of 5032
Similar Incorrect Inconsistency failed : 0 of 5032
======================================
Via ratio of lengths
All Inconsistency failed : 0 of 10000
Similar Incorrect failed : 0 of 5032
Similar Incorrect Inconsistency failed : 0 of 5032
const EPSILON = Number.EPSILON
function Triangle(p1,p2,p3){
this.p1 = p1;
this.p2 = p2;
this.p3 = p3;
}
Triangle.prototype.p1 = undefined;
Triangle.prototype.p2 = undefined;
Triangle.prototype.p3 = undefined;
Triangle.prototype.isSimilar = function(triangle){
var a1,b1,c1,a2,b2,c2,aa1,bb1,cc1,aa2,bb2,cc2; //
var t1 = [];
var t2 = [];
var sortF = function(a,b){ return a-b };
// get the length squared and length of each side
a1 = Math.sqrt(aa1 = Math.pow(this.p1.x - this.p2.x, 2) + Math.pow(this.p1.y - this.p2.y, 2));
b1 = Math.sqrt(bb1 = Math.pow(this.p2.x - this.p3.x, 2) + Math.pow(this.p2.y - this.p3.y, 2));
c1 = Math.sqrt(cc1 = Math.pow(this.p3.x - this.p1.x, 2) + Math.pow(this.p3.y - this.p1.y, 2));
a2 = Math.sqrt(aa2 = Math.pow(triangle.p1.x - triangle.p2.x, 2) + Math.pow(triangle.p1.y - triangle.p2.y, 2));
b2 = Math.sqrt(bb2 = Math.pow(triangle.p2.x - triangle.p3.x, 2) + Math.pow(triangle.p2.y - triangle.p3.y, 2));
c2 = Math.sqrt(cc2 = Math.pow(triangle.p3.x - triangle.p1.x, 2) + Math.pow(triangle.p3.y - triangle.p1.y, 2));
// get the cosin of each angle for both triangle
t1[0] = (cc1 - (aa1 + bb1)) / (-2 * a1 * b1);
t1[1] = (aa1 - (cc1 + bb1)) / (-2 * c1 * b1);
t1[2] = (bb1 - (cc1 + aa1)) / (-2 * c1 * a1);
t2[0] = (cc2 - (aa2 + bb2)) / (-2 * a2 * b2);
t2[1] = (aa2 - (cc2 + bb2)) / (-2 * c2 * b2);
t2[2] = (bb2 - (cc2 + aa2)) / (-2 * c2 * a2);
t1.sort(sortF);
t2.sort(sortF);
if(Math.abs(t1[0] - t2[0]) < EPSILON && Math.abs(t1[1] - t2[1]) < EPSILON && Math.abs(t1[2] - t2[2]) < EPSILON){
return true;
}
return false;
}
function Vec(x,y){
this.x = x;
this.y = y;
}
Vec.prototype.x = undefined;
Vec.prototype.y = undefined;
var iterations = 1000; // number of tests
var presentSimilar = 1/2; // odds of similar triangle
var presentSuperSimilar = 1/2; // odds of triangles being identical
var presentInfinity = 0;//1/20; // odds of a divide by zero
var presentDegenerate = 0;//1/100; // odds of a degenerate triangle can be colinear or degenerate right triangle
var v; // temp for swap
var xdx,xdy,ydx,ydy; // vars for rotation
var copyVec = [["p1","p2","p3"],["p2","p3","p1"],["p3","p1","p2"]]; // pick a vec for selecting vecs
// the triangles for testing;
var tri1 = new Triangle(new Vec(0,0), new Vec(0,0), new Vec(0,0));
var tri2 = new Triangle(new Vec(0,0), new Vec(0,0), new Vec(0,0));
// max Random
function rMax(){
return ((Math.random()*2)-1) * Number.MAX_SAFE_INTEGER;
}
// rotate function
function rotate(vec){
var x = vec.x;
var y = vec.y;
vec.x = x * xdx + y * ydx;
vec.y = x * xdy + y * ydy;
};
function translateVec(vec,x,y){
vec.x += x;
vec.y += y;
}
function translateTriangle(tri,x,y){
translateVec(tri.p1);
translateVec(tri.p2);
translateVec(tri.p3);
}
// make infinite vec to simulate the result of a divide by zero
function doInfinity(vec){
if(Math.random() < presentInfinity){
if(Math.random() < 0.5){
vec.x = Infinity;
vec.y = Infinity;
}else{
vec.x = -Infinity;
vec.y = -Infinity;
}
}
}
// create a random vector;
function randomVec(vec){
vec.x = rMax();
vec.y = rMax();
doInfinity(vec);
}
// create a random triangle
function randomTriangle(tri){
var p,r;
randomVec(tri.p1);
randomVec(tri.p2);
randomVec(tri.p3);
if(Math.random() < presentDegenerate){
r = Math.random();
if(r < 1/3){ // Degenerate right triangle
p = copyVec[Math.floor(Math.random()*3)]; // get two vec to be at the same location
tri[p[0]].x = tri[p[1]].x;
tri[p[0]].y = tri[p[1]].y;
}else // Degenerate colinear triangle
if(r < 2/3){
p = copyVec[Math.floor(Math.random()*3)]; // get two vec to be at the same location
r = Math.random();
tri[p[0]].x = (tri[p[1]].x - tri[p[2]].x) * r + tri[p[2]].x;
tri[p[0]].y = (tri[p[1]].y - tri[p[2]].y) * r + tri[p[2]].y;
}else{ // degenerate undimentioned triangle. Has not area
tri.p1.x = tri.p2.x = tri.p3.x;
tri.p1.y = tri.p2.y = tri.p3.y;
}
}
}
function runTest(){
var result1,result2,mustBeSimilar;
var countSimilar = 0;
var countNorm = 0;
var error1 = 0;
var error2 = 0;
for(var i = 0; i < iterations; i ++){
randomTriangle(tri1);
if(Math.random() < presentSimilar){
mustBeSimilar = true;
countSimilar += 1;
tri2.p1.x = tri1.p1.x;
tri2.p1.y = tri1.p1.y;
tri2.p2.x = tri1.p2.x;
tri2.p2.y = tri1.p2.y;
tri2.p3.x = tri1.p3.x;
tri2.p3.y = tri1.p3.y;
if(Math.random() >= presentSuperSimilar){
if(Math.random() < 0.5){ // swap two
v = tri2.p1;
tri2.p1 = tri2.p2;
tri2.p2 = v;
}
if(Math.random() < 0.5){ // swap two
v = tri2.p2;
tri2.p2 = tri2.p3;
tri2.p3 = v;
}
if(Math.random() < 0.5){ // swap two
v = tri2.p1;
tri2.p1 = tri2.p3;
tri2.p3 = v;
}
// scale and or mirror the second triangle
v = Math.random() * 2 - 1;
tri2.p1.x *= v;
tri2.p1.y *= v;
tri2.p2.x *= v;
tri2.p2.y *= v;
tri2.p3.x *= v;
tri2.p3.y *= v;
// rotate the triangle
v = (Math.random()- 0.5) * Math.PI * 4;
ydy = xdx = Math.cos(v);
ydx = -(xdy = Math.sin(v));
rotate(tri2.p1);
rotate(tri2.p2);
rotate(tri2.p3);
}
}else{
randomTriangle(tri2);
mustBeSimilar = false;
}
countNorm += 1;
result1 = tri1.isSimilar(tri2);
result2 = tri2.isSimilar(tri1);
if(result1 !== result2){
error1 += 1;
}
if(mustBeSimilar && (!result1 || !result2)){
error2 += 1;
}
for(var j = 0; j < 10; j++){
translateTriangle(tri1,Math.random(),Math.random());
translateTriangle(tri2,Math.random(),Math.random());
if(mustBeSimilar){
countSimilar += 1;
}
countNorm += 1;
result1a = tri1.isSimilar(tri2);
result2a = tri2.isSimilar(tri1);
if(result1a !== result2a || result1 !== result1a || result2 !== result2a){
error1 += 1;
}
if(mustBeSimilar && (!result1a || !result2a)){
error2 += 1;
}
}
}
divResult1.textContent = "Inconsistancy result failed : "+error1 + " of "+ countNorm;
divResult2.textContent = "Incorrect result failed : "+error2 + " of "+ countSimilar
}
var button = document.createElement("input");
button.type = "button"
button.value = "Run test"
button.onclick = runTest;
var divResult1 = document.createElement("div");
var divResult2 = document.createElement("div");
document.body.appendChild(button);
document.body.appendChild(divResult1);
document.body.appendChild(divResult2);
Following willywokka's comment. You may be able to just see if there is a single scale factor.
// get the length squared and length of each side
a1 = Math.sqrt(...);
....
// Sort the values so a1 < b1 < c1, a2 < b2 < c2
if(b1 < a1) { tmp = b1; b1 = a1; a1 = tmp }
if(c1 < a1) { tmp = c1; c1 = a1; a1 = tmp }
if(c1 < b1) { tmp = c1; c1 = b1; b1 = tmp }
if(b2 < a2) { tmp = b2; b2 = a2; a2 = tmp }
if(c2 < a2) { tmp = c2; c2 = a2; a2 = tmp }
if(c2 < b2) { tmp = c2; c2 = b2; b2 = tmp }
// work out the scale factors
ka = a2 / a1;
kb = b2 / b1;
kc = c2 / c1;
if( abs(ka - kb) < epsilon && abs(kc - ka) < epsilon && abs(kc - kb) < epsilon )
// similar
else
// not similar
Rather than working with an absolute epsilon you might want one which is within x% of the value. So that the values are considered equal if ka - x% < kb < ka + x%, that is (1-x/100) ka < kb < (1+x/100) ka. Or (1-x/100) < kb/ka < (1+x/100), or abs(kb/ka) < x/100.
There is a statistically more rigorous approach to the problem. This would involve a pretty precise definition of what we mean by similar and examining the distribution of triangles. Statistical shape analysis is a poor starting point. David George Kendall did work examining the shape of triangles.
If it is really just angles, you can simply compute the three inner angles of both triangles. Just use the cosine,
cos(angle) = dot (normalized(edge[i]),normalized(edge[(i+1)%3])).
with edge[i] = p[(i+1)%3] - p[i].
So you have three cos(angle) for each triangle one and two. Then just check every permutation. A triangle has only six permutations. (http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Permutation.html)
besterr = max;
for i=1..6 perm(i) in tri1
for j=1..6 perm(j) in tri2
err = 0
for k=1..3 angle
err += abs(angletri1[perm[i,k]] - angletri2[perm[j,k]])
if (err<besterr) besterr = err;
return besterr;
Does that give your expected result? We certainly can do more efficient. But this is the brute force test algorithm. One thing to note is that it only works for triangles - any vertex permutation in a triangle is the same triangle outline. That would not be the case for a bigger polygon.
Once this works you can start experimenting. Do you get the same result for angle and cos(angle)? For err += abs(d) and err += d*d? Can you just check 2 permutations by sorting angles? Remember triangle angles sum (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sum_of_angles_of_a_triangle). What computations are redundant?
And finally: Is it really the metric you want? Are two triangles with opposite winding really similar? A huge and a tiny one?

Categories