Re^2: Data visualisation.


"be consistent"
	PerlMonks

Re^2: Data visualisation.

by LanX (Saint)

on Jan 02, 2014 at 13:54 UTC ( [id://1068956]=note: print w/replies, xml )

Need Help??

in reply to Re: Data visualisation.
in thread Data visualisation.

Did you check if the data conforms to the Triangle_inequality ?

If not I doubt that any sane visualization is possible.

update

well at least with straight lines...

... but I fear with curved lines it might always be possible but not usable!

Cheers Rolf

( addicted to the Perl Programming Language)

Comment on Re^2: Data visualisation.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Data visualisation. by roboticus (Chancellor) on Jan 02, 2014 at 15:14 UTC
LanX: No, I didn't think to do that. It's a trivial check, so when I get home, I'll try to remember to add that. (Unfortunately, the security restrictions at work make it extremely difficult to actually do any coding.) Update: I've now added the triangle inequality check in the version at Re: Data visualisation.. Update 2: There was an error in my triangle inequality check (it didn't affect my original results, because my code didn't use any of the invalid triangles--by luck, not design). The error was that I only made one of the three checks required. The new check function is: sub chk_triangle_inequality { # Get the points my ($A, $B, $C) = @_; # Calc the distances my ($AB, $AC, $BC) = (dist_2($A, $B), dist_2($A, $C), dist_2($B, $ +C)); if ($AB > $AC + $BC) { print "ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points ($A, $B, $C +) ($AB > $AC+$BC)\n"; } elsif ($AC > $AB + $BC) { print "ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points ($A, $B, $C +) ($AC > $AB+$BC)\n"; } elsif ($BC > $AB + $AC) { print "ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points ($A, $B, $C +) ($BC > $AB+$AC)\n"; } } [download] I also added an exhaustive check at the end: `print <<EOHDR; ##### # Exhaustive triangle inequality check ##### EOHDR for my $A (0 .. ($#LOCs-2) ) { for my $B ( ($A+1) .. ($#LOCs-1) ) { for my $C ( ($B+1) .. $#LOCs ) { chk_triangle_inequality($A, $B, $C); } } }` [download] The exhaustive check gives the following misses: ##### # Exhaustive triangle inequality check ##### ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (0, 5, 6) (150 > 80+63) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (0, 6, 7) (134 > 80+29) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (0, 6, 15) (332 > 80+246) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (0, 6, 16) (121 > 80+29) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (1, 2, 3) (661 > 390+228) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (1, 2, 13) (466 > 390+74) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (1, 3, 4) (661 > 227+383) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (1, 3, 5) (661 > 488+120) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (1, 3, 6) (661 > 572+77) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (1, 3, 7) (661 > 530+105) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (1, 3, 10) (661 > 282+324) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (1, 3, 12) (661 > 567+27) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (1, 3, 13) (661 > 466+182) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (1, 3, 14) (661 > 420+239) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (1, 3, 16) (661 > 518+84) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (1, 5, 6) (572 > 488+63) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (1, 5, 7) (530 > 488+34) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (1, 6, 7) (572 > 530+29) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (1, 6, 16) (572 > 518+29) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (2, 3, 12) (228 > 191+27) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (2, 3, 15) (472 > 228+237) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (2, 3, 16) (228 > 142+84) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (2, 5, 6) (196 > 112+63) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (2, 5, 7) (154 > 112+34) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (2, 6, 7) (196 > 154+29) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (2, 6, 16) (196 > 142+29) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 4, 12) (383 > 27+346) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 4, 16) (383 > 84+297) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 5, 12) (120 > 27+83) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 5, 15) (364 > 120+237) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 5, 16) (120 > 84+35) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 6, 12) (77 > 27+47) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 6, 15) (332 > 77+237) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 7, 12) (105 > 27+68) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 7, 15) (349 > 105+237) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 9, 12) (476 > 27+439) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 9, 16) (476 > 84+390) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 10, 12) (324 > 27+287) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 10, 16) (324 > 84+238) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 12, 13) (182 > 27+145) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 12, 14) (239 > 27+202) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 12, 15) (289 > 27+237) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 12, 16) (84 > 27+55) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 13, 15) (426 > 182+237 +) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 13, 16) (182 > 84+96) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 14, 15) (483 > 239+237 +) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 14, 16) (239 > 84+153) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (3, 15, 16) (336 > 237+84) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (4, 5, 6) (351 > 267+63) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (4, 5, 7) (309 > 267+34) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (4, 6, 7) (351 > 309+29) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (4, 6, 16) (351 > 297+29) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (5, 6, 9) (444 > 63+360) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (5, 6, 10) (292 > 63+208) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (5, 6, 14) (207 > 63+123) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (5, 7, 9) (402 > 34+360) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (5, 7, 10) (250 > 34+208) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (5, 7, 14) (165 > 34+123) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (6, 7, 9) (444 > 29+402) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (6, 7, 10) (292 > 29+250) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (6, 7, 13) (150 > 29+108) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (6, 7, 14) (207 > 29+165) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (6, 9, 16) (444 > 29+390) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (6, 10, 16) (292 > 29+238) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (6, 13, 16) (150 > 29+96) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (6, 14, 16) (207 > 29+153) ERROR: Triangle inequality fails for points (9, 13, 14) (336 > 240+57) [download] ...roboticus When your only tool is a hammer, all problems look like your thumb.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: Data visualisation. by LanX (Saint) on Jan 04, 2014 at 09:38 UTC
Hi roboticus > triangle inequality check Already a visual test reveals that projecting the data into 2D wouldn't make sense: `M / \ 27 / \ 47 / \ D ----- G 77` [download] 27 + 47 = 74 < 77 `A B C D E F G G: 80 572 196 77 351 63 0 ... ... M: 70 567 191 27 346 83 *47 ...` [download] Cheers Rolf ( addicted to the Perl Programming Language) updates added table improved wording	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^5: Data visualisation. by roboticus (Chancellor) on Jan 04, 2014 at 21:44 UTC
LanX: Yeah, my original triangle check was faulty. I only checked one case, rather than all three. Using your data, I had only a 1/3 chance of detecting that particular triangle as failing the inequality: 47 < 27 + 77 : Passes 27 < 47 + 77 : Passes 77 !< 27 + 47 : Fails... Since I only checked one case, I'd've missed a bad triangle. But my code didn't check all that many triangles, either, so it missed anyway. So I added an exhaustive check just for the helluvit. I've updated the node above accordingly. ...roboticus When your only tool is a hammer, all problems look like your thumb.	[reply]
Re^6: Data visualisation. by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Jan 05, 2014 at 03:26 UTC
Re^7: Data visualisation. by roboticus (Chancellor) on Jan 05, 2014 at 06:42 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here
A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.
Re^4: Data visualisation. by LanX (Saint) on Jan 06, 2014 at 10:22 UTC
Hi roboticus, > Update 2... The exhaustive check gives the following misses: wow ...indeed "a mess of bad triangles". TSP publications reach back to before the 1950s and IIRC the data was mostly taken from German or Swiss cities. 17 cities is a rather small and surely old example and I think at that time they just copied the kilometers from a tourist guide or train schedule or similar, w/o taking much care. So my theory was that just reaching the city limits naturally causes an error for large communities like Berlin or Z�rich. But I don't think it's worth to try to correct this now with something like a fuzzy surface in the visualization, better try starting from the beginning with real coordinates. At least I think questioning the quality in my first reply was justified, it's worth checking data before trying to work with it. Cheers Rolf ( addicted to the Perl Programming Language)	[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom

Log In^?

Domain Nodelet^?

www.com | www.net | www.org

Node Status^?

node history
Node Type: note [id://1068956]
help

Chatterbox^?

How do I use this? • Last hour • Other CB clients

Other Users^?

Others about the Monastery: (7)

As of 2024-04-23 12:34 GMT

Sections^?

Information^?

Find Nodes^?

Leftovers^?

Today I Learned

Voting Booth^?

No recent polls found