Skip to main content

graphics - "The function DiscretizeGraphics is not implemented for GraphicsComplex" confusion


Why does DiscretizeGraphics seems to work on one GraphicsComplex and not the other? Here is an example that works:


v = {{1, 0}, {0, 1}, {-1, 0}, {0, -1}};
p1 = Graphics[GraphicsComplex[v, Polygon[{1, 2, 3, 4}]]];
DiscretizeGraphics[p1]

But this does not


p2 = Graphics3D[First@ParametricPlot3D[{Cos[t],  Sin[u], c Sin[t]}, 

   {u, 0, 2 Pi}, {t, 0, 2 Pi}]];
DiscretizeGraphics[p2]

(*The function DiscretizeGraphics is not implemented for \
 GraphicsComplex[{{0.9999999999998993`,4.487989505128125`*^-7,*)

But p2 is a GraphicsComplex? Looking at FullForm[p2]


Mathematica graphics


Here is the FullForm for p1


Mathematica graphics



Are not p1 and p2 both GraphicsComplex ? p1 is 2D and p2 is 3D, but are they not both considered GraphicsComplex?


Mathematica graphics


It will good to know exactly what can and what can not be discretized. I tried to find this, but could not. All what I see are examples of usages so far.


reference: http://www.wolfram.com/mathematica/new-in-10/data-and-mesh-regions/discretizing-graphics.html


http://reference.wolfram.com/language/ref/DiscretizeGraphics.html?q=DiscretizeGraphics


Mathematica graphics


I also looked at possible issues, and did not notice anything about this. Only one that came close is this multiple volume primitives is not supported. Is this the case here?



Answer



In the end this is a bug and I filed that.


Now, what is going on: If you extract the coords and polygons from the GraphicsComplex and try to set up a MeshRegion you get a warning:



gc = First@
   ParametricPlot3D[{Cos[t], Sin[u], Sin[t]}, {u, 0, 2 Pi}, {t, 0, 
     2 Pi}];
ply = Cases[(gc)[[2]], _Polygon, Infinity]
MeshRegion[gc[[1]], ply]
MeshRegion::coplnr: "The vertices in the polygon Polygon[{{1129,1621,705,100}}] are not coplanar."

I guess that is what is happening internally and then the conversion is rejected. It could have given a better message, though.


All of the Graphics(3D) functions were written before the MeshRegion functionality became available and used their own mesh format. For graphics it is not too important that the underlying mesh is of a good quality (e.g. no non coplanar elements). They human eye is very forgiving in that sense. But for computations over meshes it is essential that the underlying mesh has a reasonable quality. In this case the ParametricPlot3D needs to get rid of those non coplanar elements.


To get a discretized cylinder could use



DiscretizeGraphics[Cylinder[]]

enter image description here


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

functions - Get leading series expansion term?

Given a function f[x] , I would like to have a function leadingSeries that returns just the leading term in the series around x=0 . For example: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x)] x and leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x^3)/4)/(4 + x)] -(1/(16 x^3)) Is there such a function in Mathematica? Or maybe one can implement it efficiently? EDIT I finally went with the following implementation, based on Carl Woll 's answer: lds[ex_,x_]:=( (ex/.x->(x+O[x]^2))/.SeriesData[U_,Z_,L_List,Mi_,Ma_,De_]:>SeriesData[U,Z,{L[[1]]},Mi,Mi+1,De]//Quiet//Normal) The advantage is, that this one also properly works with functions whose leading term is a constant: lds[Exp[x],x] 1 Answer Update 1 Updated to eliminate SeriesData and to not return additional terms Perhaps you could use: leadingSeries[expr_, x_] := Normal[expr /. x->(x+O[x]^2) /. a_List :> Take[a, 1]] Then for your examples: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x), x] leadingSeries[Exp[x], x] leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x...
Post a Comment
Read more

mathematical optimization - Minimizing using indices, error: Part::pkspec1: The expression cannot be used as a part specification

I want to use Minimize where the variables to minimize are indices pointing into an array. Here a MWE that hopefully shows what my problem is. vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@ { Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; Minimize[{Total@((vec1[[#]] - vec2[[u[#]]])^2 & /@ Range[1, 3]), cons}, vars, Integers] The error I get: Part::pkspec1: The expression u[1] cannot be used as a part specification. >> Answer Ok, it seems that one can get around Mathematica trying to evaluate vec2[[u[1]]] too early by using the function Indexed[vec2,u[1]] . The working MWE would then look like the following: vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@{ Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; NMinimize[ {Total@((vec1[[#]] - Indexed[vec2, u[#]])^2 & /@ R...
Post a Comment
Read more

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]
Post a Comment
Read more