MathGroup Archive 2002

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: rectangle intersection

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg36193] Re: rectangle intersection
  • From: "Jonathan Rockmann" <MTheory at msn.com>
  • Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 04:16:17 -0400 (EDT)
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

Garry, 
Here's a solution using your "LeftSide" concept; it works perfectly but 
takes twice as much time as my solution.  Both solutions look at every 
vertex of both rectangles, but mine uses two sides from each and yours 
requires looking at all four sides of each rectangle.  I'd think yours 
should be a trifle faster than this, though.  There may be efficiencies 
I'm missing (in both solutions). 
ClearAll[cis, rect, pickRect, extent, cannotIntersect, intersects, 
daveRect] 
cis[t_] := {Cos@t, Sin@t} 
rect[{pt : {_, _}, angle_, {len1_, len2_}}] := Module[{pt2}, 
    {pt, pt2 = 
 pt + len1 cis[angle], 
   pt2 - len2 cis[angle - Pi/2], pt - len2 cis[angle - Pi/2]}] 
daveRect := {{Random[], Random[]}, Random[] + Pi/2, {Random[], 
Random[]}} 
pickRect := rect@daveRect 
extent[r1_, 
      r2_] := {Min@#, Max@#} & /@ ((Take[r1, 2] - r1[[{2, 
3}]]).Transpose@r2) 
cannotIntersect[{{min1_, max1_}, {min2_, 
      max2_}}] := max2 < min1 || min2 > max1 
intersects[r1_, r2_] := Catch[ 
    If[cannotIntersect[#], Throw[False]] & /@ 
Flatten[Transpose[Outer[extent, \ 
{r1}, {r1, r2}, 1]~Join~Outer[extent, {r2}, {r2, r1}, 1], {1, 3, 2}], 
1]; 
    Throw[True]] 
ClearAll[leftSide,leftIntersects,sides] 
sides[a_List]:=Partition[Join[a,{First@a}],2,1] 
leftSide[{a_,b_},{{c_,d_},{e_,f_}}]:=-b c+a d+b e-d e-a f+c f>0 
leftSide[a:{{_,_}..},b:{{_,_},{_,_}}]:=leftSide[#,b]&/@a 
leftSide[a_List,b:{{{_,_},{_,_}}..}]:=leftSide[a,#]&/@b 
leftIntersects[a_,b_]:=!Or@@(And@@#&/@leftSide[a,sides@b])&&! 
      Or@@(And@@#&/@leftSide[b,sides@a]) 
davePairs={daveRect,daveRect}&/@Range[10000]; 
rectanglePairs=Map[Reverse@rect[#]&,davePairs,{2}]; 
Timing[right=intersects[Sequence@@#]&/@rectanglePairs;] 
Timing[test=leftIntersects[Sequence@@#]&/@rectanglePairs;] 
right\[Equal]test 
{3.187999999999999*Second,   Null} 
{6.765000000000001*Second,   Null} 
True 
Bobby Treat 
-----Original Message----- 
From: Garry Helzer [mailto:gah at math.umd.edu] 
To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
Subject: [mg36193] [mg36162] Fwd: [mg36140] Fwd: [mg36124] RE: [mg36093] rectangle 
intersection 
As Daniel Lichtblau pointed out, the statement below about vertices is 
nonsense. Consider two overlapping rectangles arranged as a cross. You 
need to compute intersections and test them instead of vertices. 
Begin forwarded message: 
> From: Garry Helzer <gah at math.umd.edu> 
To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
> Date: Fri Aug 23, 2002  12:25:13  AM US/Eastern 
> Subject: [mg36193] [mg36162] [mg36140] Fwd: [mg36124] RE: [mg36093] rectangle 
intersection 
> 
> Begin forwarded message: 
> 
> Dear colleagues, 
> 
> any hints on how to implement a very fast routine in Mathematica for 
> testing if two rectangles have an intersection area? 
> Thanks in advance 
> Frank Brand 
> 
> 
> Here is one approach. 
> 
> Given three points {x1,y1},{x2,y2},{x3,y3}, switch to homogenous 
> coordinates a={1,x1,y1}, b={1,x2,y2}, c={1,x3,y3}. Then 
> Sign[Det[{a,b,c}]] is +1 if and only if the point a lies on your left 
as 
> you walk along the line though b and c in the direction from b to c. 
> ( If the result is zero, then a lies on the line.) 
> 
> The value of the determinant is x2y3-x3y2-x1y3+x3y1+x1y2-x2y1, and the 
> speed of the algorithm depends essentially on how fast this quantity 
can 
> be computed. Suppose we write a function LeftSide[a,{b,c}] that 
computes 
> the sign of the determinant. 
> 
> Now let {p1,p2, . . ., pn} be a list of vertices (pi={xi,yi}) of a 
> convex polygon traced counterclockwise. Then a lies within or on the 
> boundary of the polygon if and only if none of the numbers 
> LeftSide[a,{pi,p(i+1)}] are -1. That is, if -1 does not appear in the 
> list LeftSide[a,#]&/@Partition[{p1,p2,. . .,pn,p1},2,1]. 
> 
> Now use the fact that if two convex polynomials overlap, then some 
> vertex of one of them must lie inside or on the boundary of the other. 
> 
> If an overlap of positive area is required, then the check is that 
only 
> +1 appears--not that -1 does not appear. 
> 
> For two rectangles ( or parallelograms) this approach requires the 
> evaluation of 16 determinants, so it may be a bit expensive. If the 
> points have rational coordinates, then (positive) denominators may be 
> cleared in the homogeneous coordinates and the computations can be 
done 
> in integer arithmetic, at the cost of at least three more 
> multiplications per determinant. 
> 
> 
Garry Helzer 
Department of Mathematics 
University of Maryland 
College Park, MD 20742 
301-405-5176 
gah at math.umd.edu 


  • Prev by Date: Re: Silly Mathematica button question
  • Next by Date: RE: Fwd: Fwd: RE: rectangle intersection
  • Previous by thread: RE: Fwd: Fwd: RE: rectangle intersection
  • Next by thread: RE: Fwd: Fwd: RE: rectangle intersection