Skip to main content

bugs - MeshCoordinates from a RegionBoundary no longer in proper order in version 10.4


Bug introduced in V10.4 and persists through 10.4.1



Given that I have the following data set


mat = 
 {{{0.,-5.,0.},{-5.22027,0.,1.79454}},
 {{-0.858274,-4.93844,0.0924},{-5.41893,0.782172,1.77784}}, 
 {{-1.82027,-4.75528,-0.109357},{-5.60223,1.54509,1.95084}},
 {{-2.94275,-4.45503,-0.550252},{-5.77547,2.26995,2.3602}},
 {{-4.31974,-4.04509,-1.18618},{-5.94562,2.93893,3.03783}},

 {{-6.12372,-3.53553,-2.00001},{-6.12372,3.53553,3.99999}}};

domain = 
  {{{5.0165, 2 Pi}, {0, 0.756304}}, {{3.4076, 2 Pi}, {0, 2.31521}}, 
   {{3.7396, 2 Pi}, {0, 1.93244}}, {{3.85122, 2 Pi}, {0, 1.86739}},  
   {{3.91005, 2 Pi}, {0, 1.87528}}, {{3.94139, 2 Pi}, {0, 1.91028}}};

ellipsePoints[mat_, {x_, y_}] := 
  mat.{Sin[#], Cos[#], 1} & /@ Range[x, y, 0.02 Pi]
ellipsePoints[mat_, {{a_, b_}, {c_, d_}}] := 

  mat.{Sin[#], Cos[#], 1} & /@ 
   Join[Range[a, b, 0.02 Pi], Range[c, d, 0.02 Pi]]

pts = Flatten[MapThread[ellipsePoints, {mat, domain}], 1];

With help of RunnyKine's alphaShapes2DC[] function, I can find the approximate boundary


Show[Graphics[Point[pts]], RegionBoundary@alphaShapes2DC[pts, 5.5]]

enter image description here




However, when I get the coordinates of the boundary via MeshCoordinates[], which gives me a wrong order of point-set.


ListLinePlot@MeshCoordinates@RegionBoundary@alphaShapes2DC[pts, 5.5]

enter image description here


So my question is:(I using the Mathematica V$10.4$ on Windows $32$ bit system)



  • How to do to achieve the right order of point-set?



Answer



Let's look at a simpler example to show the problem. We'll create a Delaunay mesh from some random points, and generate a RegionBoundary from that.



In version 10.4:


SeedRandom[4];
mr1 = DelaunayMesh[RandomReal[1, {15, 2}]];
mr2 = RegionBoundary[mr1];
Show[mr1, HighlightMesh[mr2, 1], 
 ListLinePlot[MeshCoordinates@mr2, 
  PlotStyle -> Directive[Thick, Red]]]

10.4 output


compared with version 10.3.1 (or any previous version 10.x)



output from earlier versions


Let's look at the InputForm for this in 10.4,


mr2 // InputForm


MeshRegion[{.....}, {Line[{{2, 6}, {1, 2}, {4, 1}, {3, 5}, {6, 3}, {5, 4}}]}]

versus for 10.3,


MeshRegion[{.....}, {Line[{{1, 2}, {2, 3}, {3, 4}, {4, 5}, {5, 6}, {6,1}}]}]


How to get around this? Create a BoundaryMeshRegion and extract the polygon points from that (the points of a polygon must be in the right order or it's nonsense). The following gives identical results in 10.3 and 10.4


SeedRandom[4];
mr1 = DelaunayMesh[RandomReal[1, {15, 2}]];
mr2 = BoundaryDiscretizeRegion[mr1];
Show[mr1, HighlightMesh[mr2, 1], 
 ListLinePlot[First@First@MeshPrimitives[mr2, 2], 
  PlotStyle -> Directive[Thick, Red]]]

fixed version


And, applied to the OP,



ListLinePlot@First@First@MeshPrimitives[#, 2] &@
 BoundaryDiscretizeRegion@alphaShapes2DC[pts, 5.5]

the alpha shape


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - How to draw lines between specified dots on ListPlot?

I would like to create a plot where I have unconnected dots and some connected. So far, I have figured out how to draw the dots. My code is the following: ListPlot[{{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4,13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full] I have thought using ListLinePlot command, but I don't know how to specify to the command to draw only selected lines between the dots. Do have any suggestions/hints on how to do that? Thank you. Answer One possibility would be to use Epilog with Line : ListPlot[ {{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4, 13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full, Epilog -> { Line[ ...
Post a Comment
Read more

calculus and analysis - Integral of the Sinc product

Let us consider the following integral $$ B_n = \int_0^\infty \prod_{k=1,3,5,\dots}^n\frac{\sin (x/k)}{x/k}dx $$ By definition, Sinc[x] == Sin[x]/x , therefore B[n_?OddQ] := Integrate[Product[Sinc[x/k], {k, 1, n, 2}], {x, 0, Infinity}] B /@ Range[1, 13, 2] {Pi/2, Pi/2, Pi/2, Pi/2, Pi/2, Pi/2, Pi/2} OK, everything is fine. But... B[15] 467807924713440738696537864469 Pi/935615849440640907310521750000 What's going on? Answer As Eckhard wrote in comments B[n] is the n-th Borwein integral . (The letter B was not accidental :) ) This funny properties of Borwein integrals is related to the Fourier transform of Sinc function FourierTransform[Sinc[x], x, k] 1/2 Sqrt[Pi/2] (Sign[1 - k] + Sign[1 + k]) Plot[%, {k, -2, 2}, Filling -> 0] which is the box function. The result is $\pi/2$ while the sum $$ 1/3+1/5+\dots+1/n $$ B_n = \frac{\pi}{2} - \pi \bigg(\sum_{k=3,5,\ldots}^n\frac{1}{k} -1\biggr)^\frac{n-1}{2}\prod_{k=3,5,\dots}^n\frac{k}{k-1}. $$ For $n=15$ it is equal to $$ \frac{46780...
Post a Comment
Read more

list manipulation - Selecting multiple columns from a matrix?

Sample data: data = { {{2013, 1, 1}, 24.13, 167.67, 231.82}, {{2013, 1, 2}, 32.15, 170.92, 225.99}, {{2013, 1, 3}, 35.43, 172.68, 221.67}, {{2013, 1, 4}, 36.73, 173.05, 218.32}, {{2013, 1, 5}, 58.19, 165.96, 197.05}, {{2013, 1, 6}, 69.99, 163.50, 187.52}, {{2013, 1, 7}, 71.37, 154.21, 175.58}, {{2013, 1, 8}, 72.51, 149.66, 163.25}}; I want a DateListPlot with three graphs, so for a matrix formed by columns 1 and 2, one for columns 1 and 3, and 1 for columns 1 and 4. At the moment I'm using this code: data2 = Transpose[{data[[All, 1]], data[[All, 2]]}]; data3 = Transpose[{data[[All, 1]], data[[All, 3]]}]; data4 = Transpose[{data[[All, 1]], data[[All, 4]]}]; DateListPlot[{data2, data3, data4}, Joined -> True, Filling -> {3 -> {1}}] but I have a hunch that this can be done more efficiently. I don't like the Transpose s in particular. Any ideas? edit (for extra credit) What if I need to multiply the second column by 2, which in my solution is simp...
Post a Comment
Read more