I am new in Prolog. I am trying to develop a Program which goal is, given the X,Y coordinate of a trophy (specified in the fact trofeo(4,3)), and the coordinates of some obstacles (specified in the fact ostacolo(,)), the Program has to find the shorthest path between the initial fixed coordinates(0,0) and the trophy, avoiding obstacles and without returning in visited coordinates.
For each rule you will find a comment explaining it. The main problem is that now, I am trying to generate all the possible paths.
The fact is that if I use only the move up and move right actions, (using only the rules X1 is X+1, Y1 is Y and X1 is X, Y1 is Y+1), and without using the rule about the visited position, so without the line: ( \+(visitato(X1,Y1))-> assert(visitato(X1, Y1))),
the program gives as output all the possible paths.(For example,in the simple case here, it will return Paths = [[(0, 0), (0, 1), (1, 1)], [(0, 0), (1, 0), (1, 1)]].)
While if I add all the possible actions, and the rule:
(\+(visitato(X1,Y1))-> assert(visitato(X1, Y1))),
the program find only one of the paths, for example gives as an output only: Paths = [[(0, 0), (1, 0), (0, 0), (0, 1), (1, 1)]]. (it shows the right coordinates, but (0,0) twice, because is not assterted as visited and all in one path).
Thanks in advance to everyone.
% to calculate the max
max([X],X):-!.
max([X|T],X):- max(T,N),X>=N,!.
max([X|T],N):- max(T,N).
:- dynamic visitato/2.
ostacolo(2,0).
trofeo(1,1).
% with this I am finding the maximum X and Y value between obstacles and trophy, to set a limit in the "grid".
max_coordinate(MaxX, MaxY) :-
findall(X, ostacolo(X, _), XOstacoli),
findall(Y, ostacolo(_, Y), YOstacoli),
findall(X, trofeo(X, _), XTesoro),
findall(Y, trofeo(_, Y), YTesoro),
append(XTesoro, XOstacoli, ListaX),
append(YTesoro, YOstacoli, ListaY),
max(ListaX,MaxX),
max(ListaY,MaxY).
%every X,Y respects the limit if they are lower or equal to the maximum X and Y calculated before
limite(X, Y) :-
max_coordinate(MaxX, MaxY),
X =< MaxX,
Y =< MaxY.
% base case for recursion
path((X,Y), (X,Y), [(X,Y)], _ ).
% Limit is a constant to not exceed the Stack limit, adiacente is the rule written below
path((X,Y), Trofeo, [(X,Y)|Path], Limit) :-
Limit > 0,
adiacente((X,Y), (X1,Y1)),
NewLimit is Limit - 1,
path((X1,Y1), Trofeo, Path,NewLimit).
% I recall in the console ?- trofeo(X,Y), find_all_paths((0,0),(X,Y), Paths), to search for the paths
find_all_paths(Start, Trofeo, Paths) :-
setof(Path, path(Start, Trofeo, Path, 20), Paths).
% basically with this we are saying that there are four possible actions: move up, right, left, down. The coordinates evaluated must be positive(rule positivo), respect the limit(rule limite), must be not an obstacle(rule \+obstacle), and if they are not yet visited(rule \+(visitato(X1,Y1)), then we will insert a fact, that will state that the current X1,Y1 coordinate was visited.
adjacent((X, Y), (X1, Y1)) :-
(X1 is X, Y1 is Y - 1),
positivo(X1,Y1),
limite(X1,Y1),
\+ostacolo(X1,Y1),
( \+(visitato(X1,Y1))-> assert(visitato(X1, Y1))).
adjacent((X, Y), (X1, Y1)) :-
(X1 is X-1, Y1 is Y),
positivo(X1,Y1),
limite(X1,Y1),
\+ostacolo(X1,Y1),
( \+(visitato(X1,Y1))-> assert(visitato(X1, Y1))).
adjacent((X, Y), (X1, Y1)) :-
(X1 is X + 1, Y1 is Y),
positivo(X1,Y1),
limite(X1,Y1),
\+ostacolo(X1,Y1),
( \+(visitato(X1,Y1))-> assert(visitato(X1, Y1))).
adjacent((X, Y), (X1, Y1)) :-
(X1 is X, Y1 is Y + 1),
positivo(X1,Y1),
limite(X1,Y1),
\+ostacolo(X1,Y1),
( \+(visitato(X1,Y1))-> assert(visitato(X1, Y1))).
% establish that all the coordinates must be positive
positivo(X,Y) :-
X >= 0, Y >= 0.
The main problem in your code could be the use of assert/1, since it is rather difficult to correctly keep the state syncronized during the search. It's far easier to keep a list of visited (or better, forbidden) coordinates, that gets updated every time you step in your board. So, I suggest to start writing a next_position/3 utility predicate, for instance
next_position(CurrentPosition,ForbiddenPositions,NextPosition) :-
member(Offset,[(0,1),(1,0),(0,-1),(-1,0)]),
CurrentPosition=(Cx,Cy),
Offset=(Ox,Oy),
NextPosition=(Nx,Ny),
Nx is Cx+Ox,
Ny is Cy+Oy,
\+ memberchk(NextPosition,ForbiddenPositions).
that enumerate (on backtracking) the positions available at every step (note it needs the coordinates of the border of the playground, or it will go to infinity).
Next, you could concentrate on a single path, and only after you got it, start to worry about all paths...
The easier coding for visiting a graph uses the search capability of Prolog. Something like
find_path(Target,Target,_Forbidden,[Target]).
find_path(From,Target,Forbidden,[From|Rest]) :-
From \= Target,
next_position(From,Forbidden,Next),
find_path(Next,Target,[From|Forbidden],Rest).
It's possibile to give a somewhat graphical data rendering for a very simple test (the code above will work only on really small problems...):
test(Path) :-
Border = [
(-1,-1),( 0,-1),( 1,-1),( 2,-1),( 3,-1),
(-1, 0), /* xx */ ( 3, 0),
(-1, 1), ( 3, 1),
(-1, 2),/* yy */ ( 3, 2),
(-1, 3), /* $$ */( 3, 3),
(-1, 4),( 0, 4),( 1, 4),( 2, 4),( 3, 4)
],
Start = ( 0, 0),
Obstacles = [( 1, 0), (0, 2)],
Trophy = ( 2, 3),
append(Border,Obstacles,Forbidden),
find_path(Start,Trophy,Forbidden,Path).
Related
Does Pytorch gridsample work for this particular case.
I have an image of size [B, 100, 200] that I want to map into a smaller [B, 50, 60] space. I have the pixel 1-1 mappings stored in a [B, 100, 200, 2] tensor where most of it i guess is 0?
Is this actually possible?
The answer is yes, it is possible! But not just with the gridsample.
You can check the documentation here:
grid_sample: https://pytorch.org/docs/stable/nn.functional.html#grid-sample
interpolate: https://pytorch.org/docs/stable/nn.functional.html#interpolate
You will need the following:
import torch.nn.F as F
warped_img = F.grid_sample(input, grid)
small_img = F.interplate(warped_img, size=(50, 60))
input that is the image you have [B, 100, 200];
grid it is the 1-1 pixel mapping [B, 100, 200, 2], the values should be normalized in the range [-1, 1] with (-1, -1) being the leftmost upper corner. Notice that, if most of the values are zeros, most pixels will be mapped to the center of the image. That is because grid takes the end_location of each pixel, it does not take the displacement.
warped_img = F.grid_sample(input, grid)
Now, to downsize the image you have to use F.interpolate
small_img = F.interpolate(warped_img, size=(56, 60))
Notice that you can also downsize first (not sure how that will impact the end-result). That is because the grid is normalized!
import torch.nn.F as F
warped_img = F.grid_sample(F.interplate(input, size=(50, 60)),
F.interplate(grid, size=(50, 60)))
Notice that grid is the end location of each pixel. And it is not the displacement. If you have a flow field (just the displacement of each pixel) you can turn that into a grid with the following:
def warp(img, flow, size):
B, C, H, W = img.size()
# mesh grid
grid_x = torch.arange(W, device=img.device)
grid_y = torch.arange(H, device=img.device)
yy, xx = torch.meshgrid(grid_y, grid_x)
grid = torch.cat((xx.unsqueeze(0), yy.unsqueeze(0)), dim=0)
vgrid = grid + flow.clamp(min=-1000., max=1000.)
# scale grid to [-1,1]
vgrid[:, 0, :, :] = 2.0 * vgrid[:, 0, :, :].clone() / max(W - 1, 1) - 1.0
vgrid[:, 1, :, :] = 2.0 * vgrid[:, 1, :, :].clone() / max(H - 1, 1) - 1.0
vgrid = vgrid.permute(0, 2, 3, 1)
warped_img = F.grid_sample(img, vgrid, align_corners=False)
small_img = F.interpolate(warped_img, size=size)
return small_img
I need to implement a solver for linear programming problems. All of the restrictions are <= ones such as
5x + 10y <= 10
There can be an arbitrary amount of these restrictions. Also , x>=0 y>=0 implicitly.
I need to find the optimal solutions(max) and show the feasible region in matplotlib. I've found the optimal solution by implementing the simplex method but I can't figure out how to draw the graph.
Some approaches I've found:
This link finds the minimum of the y points from each function and uses plt.fillBetween() to draw the region. But it doesn't work when I change the order of the equations. I'm not sure which y values to minimize(). So I can't use it for arbitrary restrictions.
Find solution for every pair of restrictions and draw a polygon. Not efficient.
An easier approach might be to have matplotlib compute the feasible region on its own (with you only providing the constraints) and then simply overlay the "constraint" lines on top.
# plot the feasible region
d = np.linspace(-2,16,300)
x,y = np.meshgrid(d,d)
plt.imshow( ((y>=2) & (2*y<=25-x) & (4*y>=2*x-8) & (y<=2*x-5)).astype(int) ,
extent=(x.min(),x.max(),y.min(),y.max()),origin="lower", cmap="Greys", alpha = 0.3);
# plot the lines defining the constraints
x = np.linspace(0, 16, 2000)
# y >= 2
y1 = (x*0) + 2
# 2y <= 25 - x
y2 = (25-x)/2.0
# 4y >= 2x - 8
y3 = (2*x-8)/4.0
# y <= 2x - 5
y4 = 2 * x -5
# Make plot
plt.plot(x, 2*np.ones_like(y1))
plt.plot(x, y2, label=r'$2y\leq25-x$')
plt.plot(x, y3, label=r'$4y\geq 2x - 8$')
plt.plot(x, y4, label=r'$y\leq 2x-5$')
plt.xlim(0,16)
plt.ylim(0,11)
plt.legend(bbox_to_anchor=(1.05, 1), loc=2, borderaxespad=0.)
plt.xlabel(r'$x$')
plt.ylabel(r'$y$')
This is a vertex enumeration problem. You can use the function lineqs which visualizes the system of inequalities A x >= b for any number of lines. The function will also display the vertices on which the graph was plotted.
The last 2 lines mean that x,y >=0
from intvalpy import lineqs
import numpy as np
A = -np.array([[5, 10],
[-1, 0],
[0, -1]])
b = -np.array([10, 0, 0])
lineqs(A, b, title='Solution', color='gray', alpha=0.5, s=10, size=(15,15), save=False, show=True)
Visual Solution Link
I am working on a pedestrian tracking algorithm using Python3 & OpenCV.
We can use SIFT keypoints as an identifier of a pedestrian silhouette on a frame and then perform brute force matching between two sets of SIFT keypoints (i.e. between one frame and the next one) to find the pedestrian in the next frame.
To visualize this on the sequence of frames, we can draw a bounding rectangle delimiting the pedestrian. This is what it looks like :
The main problem is about characterizing the motion of the pedestrian using the keypoints. The idea here is to find an affine transform (that is translation in x & y, rotation & scaling) using the coordinates of the keypoints on 2 successives frames. Ideally, this affine transform somehow corresponds to the motion of the pedestrian. To track this pedestrian, we would then just have to apply the same affine transform on the bounding rectangle coordinates.
That last part doesn’t work well. The rectangle consistently shrinks over several frames to inevitably disappear or drifts away from the pedestrian, as you see below or on the previous image :
To specify, we characterize the bounding rectangle with 2 extreme points :
There are some built-in cv2 functions that can apply an affine transform to an image, like cv2.warpAffine(), but I want to apply it only to the bounding rectangle coordinates (i.e 2 points or 1 point + width & height).
To find the affine transform between the 2 sets of keypoints, I’ve written my own function (I can post the code if it helps), but I’ve observed similar results when using cv2.getAffineTransform() for instance.
Do you know how to properly apply an affine transform to this bounding rectangle ?
EDIT : here’s some explanation & code for better context :
The pedestrian detection is done with the pre-trained SVM classifier available in openCV : hog.setSVMDetector(cv2.HOGDescriptor_getDefaultPeopleDetector()) & hog.detectMultiScale()
Once a first pedestrian is detected, the SVM returns the coordinates of the associated bounding rectangle (xA, yA, w, h) (we stop using the SVM after the 1st detection as it is quite slow, and we are focusing on one pedestrian for now)
We select the corresponding region of the current frame, with image[yA: yA+h, xA: xA+w] and search for SURF keypoints within with surf.detectAndCompute()
This returns the keypoints & their associated descriptors (an array of 64 characteristics for each keypoint)
We perform brute force matching, based on the L2-norm between the descriptors and the distance in pixels between the keypoints to construct pairs of keypoints between the current frame & the previous one. The code for this function is pretty long, but should be similar to cv2.BFMatcher(cv2.NORM_L2, crossCheck=True)
Once we have the matched pairs of keypoints, we can use them to find the affine transform with this function :
previousKpts = previousKpts[:5] # select 4 best matches
currentKpts = currentKpts[:5]
# build A matrix of shape [2 * Nb of keypoints, 4]
A = np.ndarray(((2 * len(previousKpts), 4)))
for idx, keypoint in enumerate(previousKpts):
# Keypoint.pt = (x-coord, y-coord)
A[2 * idx, :] = [keypoint.pt[0], -keypoint.pt[1], 1, 0]
A[2 * idx + 1, :] = [keypoint.pt[1], keypoint.pt[0], 0, 1]
# build b matrix of shape [2 * Nb of keypoints, 1]
b = np.ndarray((2 * len(previousKpts), 1))
for idx, keypoint in enumerate(currentKpts):
b[2 * idx, :] = keypoint.pt[0]
b[2 * idx + 1, :] = keypoint.pt[1]
# convert the numpy.ndarrays to matrix :
A = np.matrix(A)
b = np.matrix(b)
# solution of the form x = [x1, x2, x3, x4]' = ((A' * A)^-1) * A' * b
x = np.linalg.inv(A.T * A) * A.T * b
theta = math.atan2(x[1, 0], x[0, 0]) # outputs rotation angle in [-pi, pi]
alpha = math.sqrt(x[0, 0] ** 2 + x[1, 0] ** 2) # scaling parameter
bx = x[2, 0] # translation along x-axis
by = x[3, 0] # translation along y-axis
return theta, alpha, bx, by
We then just have to apply the same affine transform to the corner points of the bounding rectangle :
# define the 4 bounding points using xA, yA
xB = xA + w
yB = yA + h
rect_pts = np.array([[[xA, yA]], [[xB, yA]], [[xA, yB]], [[xB, yB]]], dtype=np.float32)
# warp the affine transform into a full perspective transform
affine_warp = np.array([[alpha*np.cos(theta), -alpha*np.sin(theta), tx],
[alpha*np.sin(theta), alpha*np.cos(theta), ty],
[0, 0, 1]], dtype=np.float32)
# apply affine transform
rect_pts = cv2.perspectiveTransform(rect_pts, affine_warp)
xA = rect_pts[0, 0, 0]
yA = rect_pts[0, 0, 1]
xB = rect_pts[3, 0, 0]
yB = rect_pts[3, 0, 1]
return xA, yA, xB, yB
Save the updated rectangle coordinates (xA, yA, xB, yB), all current keypoints & descriptors, and iterate over the next frame : select image[yA: yB, xA: xA] using (xA, yA, xB, yB) we previously saved, get SURF keypoints etc.
As Micka suggested, cv2.perspectiveTransform() is an easy way to accomplish this. You'll just need to turn your affine warp into a full perspective transform (homography) by adding a third row at the bottom with the values [0, 0, 1]. For example, let's put a box with w, h = 100, 200 at the point (10, 20) and then use an affine transformation to shift the points so that the box is moved to (0, 0) (i.e. shift 10 pixels to the left and 20 pixels up):
>>> xA, yA, w, h = (10, 20, 100, 200)
>>> xB, yB = xA + w, yA + h
>>> rect_pts = np.array([[[xA, yA]], [[xB, yA]], [[xA, yB]], [[xB, yB]]], dtype=np.float32)
>>> affine_warp = np.array([[1, 0, -10], [0, 1, -20], [0, 0, 1]], dtype=np.float32)
>>> cv2.perspectiveTransform(rect_pts, affine_warp)
array([[[ 0., 0.]],
[[ 100., 0.]],
[[ 0., 200.]],
[[ 100., 200.]]], dtype=float32)
So that works perfectly as expected. You could also just simply transform the points yourself with matrix multiplication:
>>> rect_pts.dot(affine_warp[:, :2]) + affine_warp[:, 2]
array([[[ 0., 0.]],
[[ 100., 0.]],
[[ 0., 200.]],
[[ 100., 200.]]], dtype=float32)
The data is from a measurement. The picture of the plotted data
I tried using trapz twice, but I get and error code: "ValueError: operands could not be broadcast together with shapes (1,255) (256,531)"
The x has 256 points and y has 532 points, also the Z is a 2d array that has a 256 by 532 lenght. The code is below:
import numpy as np
img=np.loadtxt('focus_x.txt')
m=0
m=np.max(img)
Z=img/m
X=np.loadtxt("pixelx.txt",float)
Y=np.loadtxt("pixely.txt",float)
[X, Y] = np.meshgrid(X, Y)
volume=np.trapz(X,np.trapz(Y,Z))
The docs state that trapz should be used like this
intermediate = np.trapz(Z, x)
result = np.trapz(intermediate, y)
trapz is reducing the dimensionality of its operand (by default on the last axis) using optionally a 1D array of abscissae to determine the sub intervals of integration; it is not using a mesh grid for its operation.
A complete example.
First we compute, using sympy, the integral of a simple bilinear function over a rectangular domain (0, 5) × (0, 7)
In [1]: import sympy as sp, numpy as np
In [2]: x, y = sp.symbols('x y')
In [3]: f = 1 + 2*x + y + x*y
In [4]: f.integrate((x, 0, 5)).integrate((y, 0, 7))
Out[4]: 2555/4
Now we compute the trapezoidal approximation to the integral (as it happens, the approximation is exact for a bilinear function) — we need coordinates arrays
In [5]: x, y = np.linspace(0, 5, 11), np.linspace(0, 7, 22)
(note that the sampling is different in the two directions and different from the defalt value used by trapz) — we need a mesh grid to compute the integrand and we need to compute the integrand
In [6]: X, Y = np.meshgrid(x, y)
In [7]: z = 1 + 2*X + Y + X*Y
and eventually we compute the integral
In [8]: 4*np.trapz(np.trapz(z, x), y)
Out[8]: 2555.0
I am trying to get contourf to plot my stuff right, but it seems to switch the x and y coordinates. In the example below, I show this by evaluating a 2d Gaussian function that has different widths in x and y directions. With the values given, the width in y direction should be larger. Here is the script:
from numpy import *
from matplotlib.pyplot import *
xMax = 50
xNum = 100
w0x = 10
w0y = 15
dx = xMax/xNum
xGrid = linspace(-xMax/2+dx/2, xMax/2-dx/2, xNum, endpoint=True)
yGrid = xGrid
Int = zeros((xNum, xNum))
for idX in range(xNum):
for idY in range(xNum):
Int[idX, idY] = exp(-((xGrid[idX]/w0x)**2 + (yGrid[idY]/(w0y))**2))
fig = figure(6)
clf()
ax = subplot(2,1,1)
X, Y = meshgrid(xGrid, yGrid)
contour(X, Y, Int, colors='k')
plot(array([-xMax, xMax])/2, array([0, 0]), '-b')
plot(array([0, 0]), array([-xMax, xMax])/2, '-r')
ax.set_aspect('equal')
xlabel("x")
ylabel("y")
subplot(2,1,2)
plot(xGrid, Int[:, int(xNum/2)], '-b', label='I(x, y=max/2)')
plot(xGrid, Int[int(xNum/2), :], '-r', label='I(x=max/2, y)')
ax.set_aspect('equal')
legend()
xlabel(r"x or y")
ylabel(r"I(x or y)")
The figure thrown out is this:
On top the contour plot which has the larger width in x direction (not y). Below are slices shown, one across x direction (at constant y=0, blue), the other in y direction (at constant x=0, red). Here, everything seems fine, the y direction is broader than the x direction. So why would I have to transpose the array in order to have it plotted as I want? This seems unintuitive to me and not in agreement with the documentation.
It helps if you think of a 2D array's shape not as (x, y) but as (rows, columns), because that is how most math routines interpret them - including matplotlib's 2D plotting functions. Therefore, the first dimension is vertical (which you call y) and the second dimension is horizontal (which you call x).
Note that this convention is very prominent, even in numpy. The function np.vstack is supposed to concatenate arrays vertically works along the first dimension and np.hstack works horizontally on the second dimension.
To illustrate the point:
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
a = np.array([[0, 0, 1, 0, 0],
[0, 1, 1, 1, 0],
[1, 1, 1, 1, 1]])
a[:, 2] = 2 # set column
print(a)
plt.imshow(a)
plt.contour(a, colors='k')
This prints
[[0 0 2 0 0]
[0 1 2 1 0]
[1 1 2 1 1]]
and consistently plots
According to your convention that an array is (x, y) the command a[:, 2] = 2 should have assigned to the third row, but numpy and matplotlib both agree that it was the column :)
You can of course use your own convention how to interpret the dimensions of your arrays, but in the long run it will be more consistent to treat them as (y, x).