Skip to main content

plotting - LayeredGraphPlot Vertex Spacing / Edge Length


For anyone who has used LayeredGraphPlot (Mma v9), you have probably seen that the vertex spacing is consistent throughout, that vertices have the same minimum unit of spacing in the vertical and horizontal directions.


I know that changing AspectRatio will adjust one of the directions with respect to the other, but if I want to keep the existing aspect ratio, but want to space the vertices further apart (not resizing the overall graphic).


Without specifying the actual vertex potions using VertexCoordinateRules for each vertex, is it possible to change the vertical/horizontal spacing unit? For instance, if I just want all of the vertices to be spaced twice as far apart from each other in each direction as the default, can this be set?


UPDATE: For a given set a vertices LayeredGraphPLot chooses this minimum spacing unit, however, if you change the list of rules, or use a different set of rules (and hence how the vertices are connected), it will redraw it with different spacing, even though it could have been done using the spacing from the original set of rules, regardless of if you leave AspectRatio and ImageSize as free parameters or not. There may be an algorithm to avoid vertex crowding, but I don't see why the minimum unit spacing couldn't still be set anyway.


Here is an example, note that all of the red lines are the same size, depicting the constant unit dimension between vertices.


enter image description here


UPDATE 2: SquareOne's solution with two different data sets:


set1 = {"A" -> "B", "B" -> "C", "D" -> "F", "A" -> "F", "G" -> "B", "H" -> "C", "C" -> "G"};


enter image description here



set2 = {"B" -> "A", "B" -> "G", "D" -> "H", "A" -> "F", "G" -> "A", "H" -> "B", "F" -> "G"};


enter image description here


You can see, that with the same number of rules in the list (and hence the same number of edges), the same number of vertices, with the vertices being the same size (resizing the images), and the aspect ratios allowed to vary as needed to accommodate the plot, the edgelengths are very different.


UPDATE 3: SquareOne's solution has been modified to work for arbitrary datasets, I therefore accept his solution.



Answer



This answer is closely related to your previous post and to the answer I gave you then. They could actually be merged.


Edit


As requested, here is a new version of the function which let you change the scale of the edges while keeping the same unit length for any working set.


(I finally managed (not trivial) to get the width and height of the plot produced by the function LayeredGraphPlot ; these are needed in order to scale properly every elements in the rendering options);


As a bonus ;) the image size of the plots are now automatically scaled according to the unit length. Any other words you don't need anymore to resize manually the plots for different sets in order to compare them.



draw[set_, edgescale_: 1, aspectratio_: 0] :=
Module[{width, height, ar0, ar, thicknessDisk = 0.18},
{width, height} =
edgescale*(LayeredGraphPlot[set, Bottom, Axes -> False,
PlotRangePadding -> None][[1, 1, 1]] // Transpose // (Max@# - Min@#) & /@ # &);
ar0 = height/width;
ar = If[aspectratio == 0, ar0, aspectratio];
LayeredGraphPlot[set, Bottom, VertexLabeling -> True, DirectedEdges -> True,
EdgeRenderingFunction -> ({Black, Thickness[0.1/width], Arrow[#1, 0.05]} &),
VertexRenderingFunction -> ({EdgeForm[{Black, Thickness[0.04/width]}], White,

Disk[#1, Scaled[{thicknessDisk/width, ar0*thicknessDisk/height/ar}]],
Black, Style[Text[#2, #1], FontFamily -> "Arial", Bold,
FontSize -> Scaled[0.2/width]]} &),
PlotStyle -> Arrowheads[{{0.3/width, 0.8}}],
PlotRangePadding -> 0., Axes -> False, AspectRatio -> ar,
ImageSize -> 75*(width + 2*thicknessDisk)]]

Tests:


The example sets :


set1 = {"A" -> "B", "B" -> "C", "D" -> "F", "A" -> "F", "G" -> "B", "H" -> "C", "C" -> "G"}; 

set2 = {"B" -> "A", "B" -> "G", "D" -> "H", "A" -> "F", "G" -> "A", "H" -> "B", "F" -> "G"};

then put all this in one cell and run :


Print["set1 with edge scale = 2:"]; draw[set1, 2]
Print["set1 with edge scale = 1 and aspect ratio = 1:"]; draw[set1, 1, 1]
Print["set1 (default param.):"]; draw[set1]
Print["set2 (default param.):"]; draw[set2]

enter image description here


enter image description here



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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...

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...

What is and isn't a valid variable specification for Manipulate?

I have an expression whose terms have arguments (representing subscripts), like this: myExpr = A[0] + V[1,T] I would like to put it inside a Manipulate to see its value as I move around the parameters. (The goal is eventually to plot it wrt one of the variables inside.) However, Mathematica complains when I set V[1,T] as a manipulated variable: Manipulate[Evaluate[myExpr], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, T], 0, 1}] (*Manipulate::vsform: Manipulate argument {V[1,T],0,1} does not have the correct form for a variable specification. >> *) As a workaround, if I get rid of the symbol T inside the argument, it works fine: Manipulate[ Evaluate[myExpr /. T -> 15], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, 15], 0, 1}] Why this behavior? Can anyone point me to the documentation that says what counts as a valid variable? And is there a way to get Manpiulate to accept an expression with a symbolic argument as a variable? Investigations I've done so far: I tried using variableQ from this answer , but it says V[1...