How to generate random points within an octahedron without discarding? - math

I need random points within an octahedron, uniformly distributed. I am defining an octahedron as the volume where all points satisfy abs(x) + abs(y) + abs(z) <= 1 where abs gives absolute value. IE: each of the six vertices would be on an axis, 1 away from 0,0,0. Maybe you could call it a unit octahedron.
With the definition in mind, I can naively generate a point like so:
val x: Double = nextDouble() // 0-1 range
val y = nextDouble(1.0 -x) // 1-x is upper bound, probably <1
val z = nextDouble(1.0 -(x+y))
The problem is that this leans toward small y values, and smaller z values. Clearly not an even distribution. Also clearly, all these points are in just one of eight quadrants.
I'm avoiding the discard method because this function will be called a lot, and it just seems like I should be able to do better than throwing out the majority of points.
Note that the dual of the octahedron is the cube. Because of this, I have an inkling that there might exist a simple function to translate any point within a cube to be within the octahedron, but that's just an intuition I'm still exploring.

Here is the idea - sample points from Dirichlet distribution in D+1, select D points such that you're uniform in the simplex
x0+x1+x2 <= 1, xi >= 0
To make octahedron, randomly select octant to put your point.
Code in Python
import math
import random
def Dirichlet():
"""sample 4d Dirichlet"""
x0 = -math.log(1.0 - random.random()) # exponential
x1 = -math.log(1.0 - random.random()) # exponential
x2 = -math.log(1.0 - random.random()) # exponential
x3 = -math.log(1.0 - random.random()) # exponential
s = 1.0/(x0+x1+x2+x3) # scaling
return (x0*s, x1*s, x2*s, x3*s)
def OctahedronSampling():
x0, x1, x2, _ = Dirichlet()
octant = random.randint(0, 7)
if octant == 0:
return (x0, x1, x2)
elif octant == 1:
return (x0, -x1, x2)
elif octant == 2:
return (x0, x1, -x2)
elif octant == 3:
return (x0, -x1, -x2)
elif octant == 4:
return (-x0, x1, x2)
elif octant == 5:
return (-x0, -x1, x2)
elif octant == 6:
return (-x0, x1, -x2)
elif octant == 7:
return (-x0, -x1, -x2)
return None
for _ in range(0, 2000):
x0, x1, x2 = OctahedronSampling()
print(f"{x0} {x1} {x2}")
And here is quick graph with 2K points

You know how to choose points in a cube with uniform distribution, and a cube can be dissected into eight square pyramids. (Sorry I can't provide graphics.)
I'd start with a cube: abs(x) <= 1; abs(y) <= 1; abs(z) <= 1
Pick a point in it (a column vector, (x, y, z)), then reflect to bring it into the "top and bottom" pyramids:
if abs(x) > abs(z), swap x and z. Equivalently, multiply by
0 0 1
0 1 0
1 0 0
if abs(y) > abs(z), swap y and z. Equivalently, multiply by
1 0 0
0 0 1
0 1 0
Then invert the two pyramids to make an octahedron:
if z>0
z = 1-z
if z<0
z = -1-z
Then rotate and scale:
multiply by
1/2 -1/2 0
1/2 1/2 0
0 0 1

Related

Logic of SML recursive functions

Hi I'm trying to learn SML. I'm having trouble understanding the some of the recursive functions I'm coming across , for example
fun Square (x:int, y:int)=
if y=0
then 1
else x * Square(x,y-1);
I understand that in the else bracket the x is being multiplied by the value of the Square function taking x and y-1 as arguments and this process will continue until y hits 0 . I'm just not clear in each step of the recursion what is x being multiplied by? Furthermore once y hits 0 why doesn't the function return 1?
Thank you
The function does return 1 when y = 0, but this value is returned to the caller - Square(x,1) - which returns a value to its caller, Square(x,2), and so on.
(The big secret of recursive function is that they work exactly like non-recursive functions.)
I think one of the best ways towards understanding is to use the substitution method.
Look at Square (3,2). Replacing x and y in the function definition with their values gives
if 2 = 0 then 1 else 3 * Square (3, 2-1)
2 is clearly not 0, so we need to figure out what Square (3, 1) is before we can continue with the multiplication.
Repeat the same process:
if 1 = 0 then 1 else 3 * Square (3, 1-1)
The condition is still false, so continue with Square (3,0).
if 0 = 0 then 1 else 3 * Square (3, 0-1)
Now the condition is true, so we know that Square (3,0) is 1.
Move back one level and substitute:
if 1 = 0 then 1 else 3 * 1
So, Square (3,1) is 3. Substitute again:
if 2 = 0 then 1 else 3 * 3
which makes 9, which is what you would expect.
You could also consider this (endless) sequence of non-recursive functions:
...
fun Square_3 (x, y) = if y = 0 then 1 else x * Square_2 (x, y-1)
fun Square_2 (x, y) = if y = 0 then 1 else x * Square_1 (x, y-1)
fun Square_1 (x, y) = if y = 0 then 1 else x * Square_0 (x, y-1)
fun Square_0 (x, y) = if y = 0 then 1 else x * Square_minus1(x, y-1)
fun Square_minus1 (x, y) = ...
and then think about how Square_2(3, 2) works. Square(3,2) works in exactly the same way.
(By the way, your function has a pretty odd name. You might want to rename it.)

Determining if a point lies between two bearings from a central point

I am trying to determine if a point lies between two bearings from a central point.
The diagram below attempts to explain things
I have a central point labelled A
I have two points (labelled B & C) which provide the boundaries of the search area (based on bearing only - there is no distance element required).
I'm trying to determine if point D is within the sector formed by A-B and A-C
I've calculated the bearings from A to each B & C
In my real scenario the angle created between the bearings can be anything from 0 to 360.
There are some similar questions & answers
however in my case I'm not interested in restricting my search to the radius of a circle. And there seems to be some implementation issues around angle size and the location of the points in terms of clockwise vs counter-clockwise
It seems so simple in theory but my maths is clearly not up to scratch :(
Any advice or pseudo-code would be greatly appreciated.
Here would be my approach:
calculate first bearing angle X
calculate second bearing angle Y
calculate angle Z towards point D
if X < Z < Y, return true; otherwise, return false
In your example it looks like you'd calculate Z ~ 90deg and find 45 < 90 < 135 (is your picture wrong? is says 315).
You can use something like the "atan2" function in whatever language you're using. This is an extension of the basic arctangent function which takes not just the slope but both the rise and run and instead of returning an angle from only a 180-degree range, it returns the true angle from a 360-degree range. So
Z = atan2(Dy, Dx)
Should give you the angle (possibly in radians; be careful) that you can compare to your bearings to tell whether you're inside the search. Note that the order of X and Y matter since the order is what defines which of the two sections is in the search area (X to Y gives ~90 deg in your picture, but Y to X gives ~270 deg).
You can calculate and compare the cross products of the vectors (AB X BD), and (AC X CD).
if (AB X BD) > 0, you have a counter clock wise turn
if (AC X CD) < 0, you have a clock wise turn
If both above tests are true, then the point D is in the sector BAC
This allows you to completely avoid using expensive trig functions.
class Point:
"""small class for point arithmetic convenience
"""
def __init__(self, x: float = 0, y: float = 0) -> None:
self.x = x
self.y = y
def __sub__(self, other: 'Point') -> 'Vector':
return Vector(self.x - other.x, self.y - other.y)
class Vector:
"""small class for vector arithmetic convenience
"""
def __init__(self, x: float = 0, y: float = 0) -> None:
self.x = x
self.y = y
def cross(self, other: 'Vector') -> float:
return (self.x * other.y) - (self.y * other.x)
def in_sector(A: Point, B: Point, C: Point, D: Point) -> bool:
# construct vectors:
ab = B - A
bd = D - B
ac = C - A
cd = D - C
print(f'ab x bc = {ab.cross(bd)}, ac x cd = {ac.cross(cd)}')
return ab.cross(bd) > 0 and ac.cross(cd) < 0
if __name__ == '__main__':
A = Point(0, 0)
B = Point(1, 1)
C = Point(-1, 1)
D = Point(0, 1)
print(f'D in sector ABC: {in_sector(A, B, C, D)}', end='\n\n')
print(f'D in sector ACB: {in_sector(A, C, B, D)}') # inverting the sector definition so D is now outside
Output:
ab x bc = 1, ac x cd = -1
D in sector ABC: True
ab x bc = -1, ac x cd = 1
D in sector ACB: False

how do i transform between a static and a dynamic coordinate system

i have a setup like this:
2 coordinate systems. (x,y) is the main coordinate system and (x',y') is a coordinate system that lives inside (x,y). The system (x',y') is defined by the points x1 or x2 and if i move these 2 points around then (x',y') moves accordingly. The origin of (x',y') is defined as the middle of the vector going from x1 to x2, and the y' axis is the normal vector on x1->x2 going through the origin. If i have a point x3 defined in (x',y') and i move either of x1 or x2 to make the origin shift place, how do i then move x3 accordingly such that it maintains its position in the new (x',y') ?
And how do i make a transformation which always converts a point in (x,y) to a point in (x',y') nomatter how x1 and x2 have been set?
I was thinking that if i had more points than just the one i am moving (x1 or x2) i guess i could try to estimate theta, tx, ty of the transformation
[x2'] [cos(theta) , sin(theta), tx][x2]
[y2'] = [-sin(theta), cos(theta), ty][y2]
[ 1 ]  [ 0 , 0 , 1 ][1 ]
and just apply that estimated transformation to x3 and i would be good...mmm but i think i would need 3 points in order to estimate theta, tx and ty right?
I mean i could estimate using some least squares approach...but 3 unknowns requires 3 coordinate sets right?
I tried to implement this and calculate an example. I hope you understand the syntax. Its not really giving me what i expect:
import math
import numpy as np
x1=[ 0,10]
x2=[10,20]
rx = x2[0] - x1[0]
ry = x2[1] - x1[1]
rlen = math.sqrt(rx*rx+ry*ry)
c = rx / rlen
s = ry / rlen
dx = - ( x1[0] + x2[0] )/2 # changing the sign to be negative seems to
dy = - ( x1[1] + x2[1] )/2 # rectify translation. Rotation still is wrong
M = np.array([[c, -s, 0],[s, c, 0],[dx, dy, 1]])
print( np.dot(x2 + [1],M) )
# Yields -> [ 15.92031022 -8.63603897 1. ] and should yield [5,0,1]
Since I am trying to transform the x2 coordinate, should the result then not have the value 0 in the y-component since its located in the x-axis?
Ok, I tried doing the implementation for x3 from dynamic1 to dynamic2 which the check is that x3 should end up with the same coordinate in both d1 and d2. I did that as you suggested, but I do not get the same coordinate in both d1 and d2. Did i misunderstand something?
import math
import numpy as np
x1=[ 1,1]
x2=[ 7,9]
x3=[4,3]
rx = (x2[0] - x1[0])
ry = (x2[1] - x1[1])
rlen = math.sqrt( rx*rx + ry*ry )
c = rx / rlen
s = ry / rlen
dx = ( x1[0] + x2[0] )/2
dy = ( x1[1] + x2[1] )/2
M = np.array([[c, -s, 0],[s, c, 0],[-dx*c-dy*s, dx*s-dy*c, 1]])
Minv = np.array([[c, s, 0],[-s, c, 0],[dx, dy, 1]])
x1new=[ 1,1]
x2new=[ 17,4]
rxnew = (x2new[0] - x1new[0])
rynew = (x2new[1] - x1new[1])
rlennew = math.sqrt( rxnew*rxnew + rynew*rynew )
cnew = rxnew / rlennew
snew = rynew / rlennew
dxnew = ( x1new[0] + x2new[0] )/2
dynew = ( x1new[1] + x2new[1] )/2
Mnew = np.array([[cnew, -snew, 0],[snew, cnew, 0],[-dxnew*cnew-dynew*snew, dxnew*snew-dynew*cnew, 1]])
Mnewinv = np.array([[cnew, snew, 0],[-snew, cnew, 0],[dxnew, dynew, 1]])
M_dyn1_to_dyn2 = np.dot(Minv,Mnew)
print( np.dot(x3 + [1], M) )
print( np.dot(x3 + [1], M_dyn1_to_dyn2))
#yields these 2 outputs which should be the same:
[-1.6 -1.2 1. ]
[-3.53219692 8.29298408 1. ]
Edit. Matrix correction.
To translate coordinates from static system to (x1,x2) defined one, you have to apply affine transformation.
Matrix of this transformation M consists of shift matrix S and rotation about origin R.
Matrix M is combination of S and R:
c -s 0
M = s c 0
-dx*c-dy*s dx*s-dy*c 1
Here c and s are cosine and sine of rotation angle, their values are respectively x- and y- components of unit (normalized) vector x1x2.
rx = x2.x - x1.x
ry = x2.y - x1.y
len = Sqrt(rx*rx+ry*ry)
c = rx / Len
s = ry / Len
And shift components:
dx = (x1.x + x2.x)/2
dy = (x1.y + x2.y)/2
To translate (xx,yy) coordinates from static system to rotate one, we have to find
xx' = xx*c+yy*s-dx*c-dy*s = c*(xx-dx) + s*(yy-dy)
yy' = -xx*s+yy*c+dx*s-dy*c = -s*(xx-dx) + c*(yy-dy)
Quick check:
X1 = (1,1)
X2 = (7,9)
dx = 4
dy = 5
rx = 6
ry = 8
Len = 10
c = 0.6
s = 0.8
for point (4,5):
xx-dx = 0
yy-dy = 0
xx',yy' = (0, 0) - right
for point X2 =(7,9):
xx-dx = 3
yy-dy = 4
xx' = 0.6*3 + 0.8*4 = 5 -right
yy' = -0.8*3 + 0.6*4 = 0 -right
P.S. Note that matrix to transform dyn.coordinates to static ones is inverse of M and it is simpler:
c s 0
M' = -s c 0
dx dy 1
P.P.S. You need three pairs of corresponding points to define general affine transformations. It seems here you don't need scaling and sheer, so you may determine needed transform with your x1,x2 points
I think you need double dimension array to save and set your value in that
the structure gonna be like this
=============|========|========|
index number |x |y |
=============|========|========|
first point | [0][0] | [0][1] |
second point | [1][0] | [1][1] |
third point | [2][0] | [2][1] |
=============|========|========|
I will use java in my answer
//declare the double dimension array
double matrix[][] = new double[3][2];
//setting location first point, x
matrix[0][0] = 1;
//setting location first point, y
matrix[0][1] = 1;
//fill with your formula, i only give example
//fill second point with first point and plus 1
//setting location second point, x
matrix[1][0] = matrix[0][0] + 1;
//setting location second point, y
matrix[1][1] = matrix[0][1] + 1;
//fill with your formula, i only give example
//fill third point with second point and plus 1
//setting location third point, x
matrix[2][0] = matrix[1][0] + 1;
//setting location third point, y
matrix[2][1] = matrix[1][1] + 1;

Calculation of a perspective transformation matrix

Given a point in 3D space, how can I calculate a matrix in homogeneous coordinates which will project that point into the plane z == d, where the origin is the centre of projection.
OK, let's try to sort this out, expanding on Emmanuel's answer.
Assuming that your view vector is directly along the Z axis, all dimensions must be scaled by the ratio of the view plane distance d to the original z coordinate. That ratio is trivially d / z, giving:
x' = x * (d / z)
y' = y * (d / z)
z' = z * (d / z) ( = d)
In homogenous coordinates, it's usual to start with P = [x, y, z, w] where w == 1 and the transformation is done thus:
P' = M * P
The result will have w != 1, and to get the real 3D coordinates we normalise the homogenous vector by dividing the whole thing by its w component.
So, all we need is a matrix that given [x, y, z, 1] gives us [x * d, y * d, z * d, z], i.e.
| x' | = | d 0 0 0 | * | x |
| y' | = | 0 d 0 0 | * | y |
| z' | = | 0 0 d 0 | * | z |
| w' | = | 0 0 1 0 | * | 1 |
which once normalised (by dividing by w' == z) gives you:
[ x * d / z, y * d / z, d, 1 ]
per the first set of equations above
I guess the projection you mean, as Beta says, consists in the intersection between:
the line formed by the origin O(0, 0, 0) and the point P(a, b, c) to be transformed
and the plane z=d
If I'm right, then let's have a look at the equation of this line, given by the vectorial product OP ^ OM = 0 (let's remind that the equation of a line between 2 given points A and B is given by AB ^ AM = 0, with M(x, y, z); this is a vectorial product, so all are vectors: 0 represents the null vector, AB is the vector AB, etc):
bz - cy = 0
cx - az = 0
cz - bx = 0
With z = d, we then have only 2 linearily independent equations:
bd = cy
cx = ad
So this projection converts a point P(a, b, c) into a point P'(ad/c, bd/c, d). For homogeneous coordinates that gives:
P'(ad/c, bd/c, d) = P'(ad/c, bd/c, cd/c)
= P'(ad/c: bd/c: cd/c: 1)
= P'(a: b: c: d/c)
EDIT : the matrix I 1st found was:
1, 0, 0, 0
0, 1, 0, 0
A = 0, 0, 1, 0
0, 0, 0, d/c
but it uses c which is the a coordinate of the point P !! This is nonsense, I couldn't find an expression of A that does not use these coordinates. I may not be familiar enough with homogeneous coordinates.
the homogeneous transformation matrix is (Euler roll-pitch-yaw):
|r1 r2 r3 dx|
|r4 r5 r6 dy|
|r7 r8 r9 dz|
|px py pz sf|
r1-9 are the elements of the combined rotation matrix: Rx*Ry*Rz (work it out)
dx dy and dz are displacement vector (d) elements
px py and pz are the perspective vector (p) elements
sf is the scaling factor
from here on, if you use the inverse of this, you get your projection as a perspective in any arbitrary plane by feeding rotations of your target plane, as well as it's position of origin wrt the reference one in (keep perspective vector at 0 0 0 and sf=1 for pure kinematics), you get T->T* = T1. Get T1^-1 (for kinematics, this is simply R' (transposed,), horizontal concatenated by -R'*d, then vertical concatenated simply by 0 0 0 1).
can have multiple planes e.g. a,b,c as a chain, in which case T1 = Ta*Tb*Tc*...
then, v(new) = (T1^-1)*v(old), job done.

Determine which side of a line a point lies [duplicate]

I have a set of points. I want to separate them into 2 distinct sets. To do this, I choose two points (a and b) and draw an imaginary line between them. Now I want to have all points that are left from this line in one set and those that are right from this line in the other set.
How can I tell for any given point z whether it is in the left or in the right set? I tried to calculate the angle between a-z-b – angles smaller than 180 are on the right hand side, greater than 180 on the left hand side – but because of the definition of ArcCos, the calculated angles are always smaller than 180°. Is there a formula to calculate angles greater than 180° (or any other formula to chose right or left side)?
Try this code which makes use of a cross product:
public bool isLeft(Point a, Point b, Point c){
return ((b.X - a.X)*(c.Y - a.Y) - (b.Y - a.Y)*(c.X - a.X)) > 0;
}
Where a = line point 1; b = line point 2; c = point to check against.
If the formula is equal to 0, the points are colinear.
If the line is horizontal, then this returns true if the point is above the line.
Use the sign of the determinant of vectors (AB,AM), where M(X,Y) is the query point:
position = sign((Bx - Ax) * (Y - Ay) - (By - Ay) * (X - Ax))
It is 0 on the line, and +1 on one side, -1 on the other side.
You look at the sign of the determinant of
| x2-x1 x3-x1 |
| y2-y1 y3-y1 |
It will be positive for points on one side, and negative on the other (and zero for points on the line itself).
The vector (y1 - y2, x2 - x1) is perpendicular to the line, and always pointing right (or always pointing left, if you plane orientation is different from mine).
You can then compute the dot product of that vector and (x3 - x1, y3 - y1) to determine if the point lies on the same side of the line as the perpendicular vector (dot product > 0) or not.
Using the equation of the line ab, get the x-coordinate on the line at the same y-coordinate as the point to be sorted.
If point's x > line's x, the point is to the right of the line.
If point's
x < line's x, the point is to the left of the line.
If point's x == line's x, the point is on the line.
I implemented this in java and ran a unit test (source below). None of the above solutions work. This code passes the unit test. If anyone finds a unit test that does not pass, please let me know.
Code: NOTE: nearlyEqual(double,double) returns true if the two numbers are very close.
/*
* #return integer code for which side of the line ab c is on. 1 means
* left turn, -1 means right turn. Returns
* 0 if all three are on a line
*/
public static int findSide(
double ax, double ay,
double bx, double by,
double cx, double cy) {
if (nearlyEqual(bx-ax,0)) { // vertical line
if (cx < bx) {
return by > ay ? 1 : -1;
}
if (cx > bx) {
return by > ay ? -1 : 1;
}
return 0;
}
if (nearlyEqual(by-ay,0)) { // horizontal line
if (cy < by) {
return bx > ax ? -1 : 1;
}
if (cy > by) {
return bx > ax ? 1 : -1;
}
return 0;
}
double slope = (by - ay) / (bx - ax);
double yIntercept = ay - ax * slope;
double cSolution = (slope*cx) + yIntercept;
if (slope != 0) {
if (cy > cSolution) {
return bx > ax ? 1 : -1;
}
if (cy < cSolution) {
return bx > ax ? -1 : 1;
}
return 0;
}
return 0;
}
Here's the unit test:
#Test public void testFindSide() {
assertTrue("1", 1 == Utility.findSide(1, 0, 0, 0, -1, -1));
assertTrue("1.1", 1 == Utility.findSide(25, 0, 0, 0, -1, -14));
assertTrue("1.2", 1 == Utility.findSide(25, 20, 0, 20, -1, 6));
assertTrue("1.3", 1 == Utility.findSide(24, 20, -1, 20, -2, 6));
assertTrue("-1", -1 == Utility.findSide(1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1));
assertTrue("-1.1", -1 == Utility.findSide(12, 0, 0, 0, 2, 1));
assertTrue("-1.2", -1 == Utility.findSide(-25, 0, 0, 0, -1, -14));
assertTrue("-1.3", -1 == Utility.findSide(1, 0.5, 0, 0, 1, 1));
assertTrue("2.1", -1 == Utility.findSide(0,5, 1,10, 10,20));
assertTrue("2.2", 1 == Utility.findSide(0,9.1, 1,10, 10,20));
assertTrue("2.3", -1 == Utility.findSide(0,5, 1,10, 20,10));
assertTrue("2.4", -1 == Utility.findSide(0,9.1, 1,10, 20,10));
assertTrue("vertical 1", 1 == Utility.findSide(1,1, 1,10, 0,0));
assertTrue("vertical 2", -1 == Utility.findSide(1,10, 1,1, 0,0));
assertTrue("vertical 3", -1 == Utility.findSide(1,1, 1,10, 5,0));
assertTrue("vertical 3", 1 == Utility.findSide(1,10, 1,1, 5,0));
assertTrue("horizontal 1", 1 == Utility.findSide(1,-1, 10,-1, 0,0));
assertTrue("horizontal 2", -1 == Utility.findSide(10,-1, 1,-1, 0,0));
assertTrue("horizontal 3", -1 == Utility.findSide(1,-1, 10,-1, 0,-9));
assertTrue("horizontal 4", 1 == Utility.findSide(10,-1, 1,-1, 0,-9));
assertTrue("positive slope 1", 1 == Utility.findSide(0,0, 10,10, 1,2));
assertTrue("positive slope 2", -1 == Utility.findSide(10,10, 0,0, 1,2));
assertTrue("positive slope 3", -1 == Utility.findSide(0,0, 10,10, 1,0));
assertTrue("positive slope 4", 1 == Utility.findSide(10,10, 0,0, 1,0));
assertTrue("negative slope 1", -1 == Utility.findSide(0,0, -10,10, 1,2));
assertTrue("negative slope 2", -1 == Utility.findSide(0,0, -10,10, 1,2));
assertTrue("negative slope 3", 1 == Utility.findSide(0,0, -10,10, -1,-2));
assertTrue("negative slope 4", -1 == Utility.findSide(-10,10, 0,0, -1,-2));
assertTrue("0", 0 == Utility.findSide(1, 0, 0, 0, -1, 0));
assertTrue("1", 0 == Utility.findSide(0,0, 0, 0, 0, 0));
assertTrue("2", 0 == Utility.findSide(0,0, 0,1, 0,2));
assertTrue("3", 0 == Utility.findSide(0,0, 2,0, 1,0));
assertTrue("4", 0 == Utility.findSide(1, -2, 0, 0, -1, 2));
}
First check if you have a vertical line:
if (x2-x1) == 0
if x3 < x2
it's on the left
if x3 > x2
it's on the right
else
it's on the line
Then, calculate the slope: m = (y2-y1)/(x2-x1)
Then, create an equation of the line using point slope form: y - y1 = m*(x-x1) + y1. For the sake of my explanation, simplify it to slope-intercept form (not necessary in your algorithm): y = mx+b.
Now plug in (x3, y3) for x and y. Here is some pseudocode detailing what should happen:
if m > 0
if y3 > m*x3 + b
it's on the left
else if y3 < m*x3 + b
it's on the right
else
it's on the line
else if m < 0
if y3 < m*x3 + b
it's on the left
if y3 > m*x3+b
it's on the right
else
it's on the line
else
horizontal line; up to you what you do
I wanted to provide with a solution inspired by physics.
Imagine a force applied along the line and you are measuring the torque of the force about the point. If the torque is positive (counterclockwise) then the point is to the "left" of the line, but if the torque is negative the point is the "right" of the line.
So if the force vector equals the span of the two points defining the line
fx = x_2 - x_1
fy = y_2 - y_1
you test for the side of a point (px,py) based on the sign of the following test
var torque = fx*(py-y_1)-fy*(px-x_1)
if torque>0 then
"point on left side"
else if torque <0 then
"point on right side"
else
"point on line"
end if
Assuming the points are (Ax,Ay) (Bx,By) and (Cx,Cy), you need to compute:
(Bx - Ax) * (Cy - Ay) - (By - Ay) * (Cx - Ax)
This will equal zero if the point C is on the line formed by points A and B, and will have a different sign depending on the side. Which side this is depends on the orientation of your (x,y) coordinates, but you can plug test values for A,B and C into this formula to determine whether negative values are to the left or to the right.
basically, I think that there is a solution which is much easier and straight forward, for any given polygon, lets say consist of four vertices(p1,p2,p3,p4), find the two extreme opposite vertices in the polygon, in another words, find the for example the most top left vertex (lets say p1) and the opposite vertex which is located at most bottom right (lets say ). Hence, given your testing point C(x,y), now you have to make double check between C and p1 and C and p4:
if cx > p1x AND cy > p1y ==> means that C is lower and to right of p1
next
if cx < p2x AND cy < p2y ==> means that C is upper and to left of p4
conclusion, C is inside the rectangle.
Thanks :)
#AVB's answer in ruby
det = Matrix[
[(x2 - x1), (x3 - x1)],
[(y2 - y1), (y3 - y1)]
].determinant
If det is positive its above, if negative its below. If 0, its on the line.
Here's a version, again using the cross product logic, written in Clojure.
(defn is-left? [line point]
(let [[[x1 y1] [x2 y2]] (sort line)
[x-pt y-pt] point]
(> (* (- x2 x1) (- y-pt y1)) (* (- y2 y1) (- x-pt x1)))))
Example usage:
(is-left? [[-3 -1] [3 1]] [0 10])
true
Which is to say that the point (0, 10) is to the left of the line determined by (-3, -1) and (3, 1).
NOTE: This implementation solves a problem that none of the others (so far) does! Order matters when giving the points that determine the line. I.e., it's a "directed line", in a certain sense. So with the above code, this invocation also produces the result of true:
(is-left? [[3 1] [-3 -1]] [0 10])
true
That's because of this snippet of code:
(sort line)
Finally, as with the other cross product based solutions, this solution returns a boolean, and does not give a third result for collinearity. But it will give a result that makes sense, e.g.:
(is-left? [[1 1] [3 1]] [10 1])
false
Issues with the existing solution:
While I found Eric Bainville's answer to be correct, I found it entirely inadequate to comprehend:
How can two vectors have a determinant? I thought that applied to matrices?
What is sign?
How do I convert two vectors into a matrix?
position = sign((Bx - Ax) * (Y - Ay) - (By - Ay) * (X - Ax))
What is Bx?
What is Y? Isn't Y meant to be a Vector, rather than a scalar?
Why is the solution correct - what is the reasoning behind it?
Moreover, my use case involved complex curves rather than a simple line, hence it requires a little re-jigging:
Reconstituted Answer
Point a = new Point3d(ax, ay, az); // point on line
Point b = new Point3d(bx, by, bz); // point on line
If you want to see whether your points are above/below a curve, then you would need to get the first derivative of the particular curve you are interested in - also known as the tangent to the point on the curve. If you can do so, then you can highlight your points of interest. Of course, if your curve is a line, then you just need the point of interest without the tangent. The tangent IS the line.
Vector3d lineVector = curve.GetFirstDerivative(a); // where "a" is a point on the curve. You may derive point b with a simple displacement calculation:
Point3d b = new Point3d(a.X, a.Y, a.Z).TransformBy(
Matrix3d.Displacement(curve.GetFirstDerivative(a))
);
Point m = new Point3d(mx, my, mz) // the point you are interested in.
The Solution:
return (b.X - a.X) * (m.Y - a.Y) - (b.Y - a.Y) * (m.X - a.X) < 0; // the answer
Works for me! See the proof in the photo above. Green bricks satisfy the condition, but the bricks outside were filtered out! In my use case - I only want the bricks that are touching the circle.
Theory behind the answer
I will return to explain this. Someday. Somehow...
An alternative way of getting a feel of solutions provided by netters is to understand a little geometry implications.
Let pqr=[P,Q,R] are points that forms a plane that is divided into 2 sides by line [P,R]. We are to find out if two points on pqr plane, A,B, are on the same side.
Any point T on pqr plane can be represented with 2 vectors: v = P-Q and u = R-Q, as:
T' = T-Q = i * v + j * u
Now the geometry implications:
i+j =1: T on pr line
i+j <1: T on Sq
i+j >1: T on Snq
i+j =0: T = Q
i+j <0: T on Sq and beyond Q.
i+j: <0 0 <1 =1 >1
---------Q------[PR]--------- <== this is PQR plane
^
pr line
In general,
i+j is a measure of how far T is away from Q or line [P,R], and
the sign of i+j-1 implicates T's sideness.
The other geometry significances of i and j (not related to this solution) are:
i,j are the scalars for T in a new coordinate system where v,u are the new axes and Q is the new origin;
i, j can be seen as pulling force for P,R, respectively. The larger i, the farther T is away from R (larger pull from P).
The value of i,j can be obtained by solving the equations:
i*vx + j*ux = T'x
i*vy + j*uy = T'y
i*vz + j*uz = T'z
So we are given 2 points, A,B on the plane:
A = a1 * v + a2 * u
B = b1 * v + b2 * u
If A,B are on the same side, this will be true:
sign(a1+a2-1) = sign(b1+b2-1)
Note that this applies also to the question: Are A,B in the same side of plane [P,Q,R], in which:
T = i * P + j * Q + k * R
and i+j+k=1 implies that T is on the plane [P,Q,R] and the sign of i+j+k-1 implies its sideness. From this we have:
A = a1 * P + a2 * Q + a3 * R
B = b1 * P + b2 * Q + b3 * R
and A,B are on the same side of plane [P,Q,R] if
sign(a1+a2+a3-1) = sign(b1+b2+b3-1)
equation of line is y-y1 = m(x-x1)
here m is y2-y1 / x2-x1
now put m in equation and put condition on y < m(x-x1) + y1 then it is left side point
eg.
for i in rows:
for j in cols:
if j>m(i-a)+b:
image[i][j]=0
A(x1,y1) B(x2,y2) a line segment with length L=sqrt( (y2-y1)^2 + (x2-x1)^2 )
and a point M(x,y)
making a transformation of coordinates in order to be the point A the new start and B a point of the new X axis
we have the new coordinates of the point M
which are
newX = ((x-x1)(x2-x1)+(y-y1)(y2-y1)) / L
from (x-x1)*cos(t)+(y-y1)*sin(t) where cos(t)=(x2-x1)/L, sin(t)=(y2-y1)/L
newY = ((y-y1)(x2-x1)-(x-x1)(y2-y1)) / L
from (y-y1)*cos(t)-(x-x1)*sin(t)
because "left" is the side of axis X where the Y is positive, if the newY (which is the distance of M from AB) is positive, then it is on the left side of AB (the new X axis)
You may omit the division by L (allways positive), if you only want the sign

Resources