mplcursors: show and highlight coordinates of nearby local extreme - python-3.x

I have code that shows the label for each point in a matplotlib scatterplot using mplcursors, similar to this example. I want to know how to, form a list of values, make a certain point stand out, as in if I have a graph of points y=-x^2. When I go near the peak, it shouldn't show 0.001, but 0 instead, without the trouble needing to find the exact mouse placement of the top. I can't solve for each point in the graph, as I don't have a specific function.

Supposing the points in the scatter plot are ordered, we can investigate whether an extreme in a nearby window is also an extreme in a somewhat larger window. If, so we can report that extreme with its x and y coordinates.
The code below only shows the annotation when we're close to a local maximum or minimum. It also temporarily shows a horizontal and vertical line to indicate the exact spot. The code can be a starting point for many variations.
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import mplcursors
import numpy as np
near_window = 10 # the width of the nearby window
far_window = 20 # the width of the far window
def show_annotation(sel):
ind = sel.target.index
near_start_index = max(0, ind - near_window)
y_near = y[near_start_index: min(N, ind + near_window)]
y_far = y[max(0, ind - far_window): min(N, ind + far_window)]
near_max = y_near.max()
far_max = y_far.max()
annotation_str = ''
if near_max == far_max:
near_argmax = y_near.argmax()
annotation_str = f'local max:\nx:{x[near_start_index + near_argmax]:.3f}\ny:{near_max:.3f}'
maxline = plt.axhline(near_max, color='crimson', ls=':')
maxline_x = plt.axvline(x[near_start_index+near_argmax], color='grey', ls=':')
sel.extras.append(maxline)
sel.extras.append(maxline_x)
else:
near_min = y_near.min()
far_min = y_far.min()
if near_min == far_min:
near_argmin = y_near.argmin()
annotation_str = f'local min:\nx:{x[near_start_index+near_argmin]:.3f}\ny:{near_min:.3f}'
minline = plt.axhline(near_min, color='limegreen', ls=':')
minline_x = plt.axvline(x[near_start_index + near_argmin], color='grey', ls=':')
sel.extras.append(minline)
sel.extras.append(minline_x)
if len(annotation_str) > 0:
sel.annotation.set_text(annotation_str)
else:
sel.annotation.set_visible(False) # hide the annotation
# sel.annotation.set_text(f'x:{sel.target[0]:.3f}\n y:{sel.target[1]:.3f}')
N = 500
x = np.linspace(0, 100, 500)
y = np.cumsum(np.random.normal(0, 0.1, N))
box = np.ones(20) / 20
y = np.convolve(y, box, mode='same')
scat = plt.scatter(x, y, s=1)
cursor = mplcursors.cursor(scat, hover=True)
cursor.connect('add', show_annotation)
plt.show()

Related

Interference of canvas items and problem in setting coordinates

I'm working on an animation of a moving object, while drawing it's path.
I want to draw the pixels in which the center of the object went through... but guess what? python decided to set the NW anchor of the image with the coordinates I send, instead of the center. I infer it has something to do with the pixels I draw simultaneously (creating a one pixel rectangle). so the image appear on the right of the path bellow... I want the center of it to be on the top of the pixels... adding the main of the code:
from tkinter import*
import time
dt = 0.01
clock_place = (500, 10)
def round_two(t, t0):
return round((t-t0)*100)/100
def round_three(t, t0):
return round((t-t0)*1000)/1000
# showing 'real time motion' for a known path (also cyclic), with
# parametric representation
def paint_known_path(x_pos, y_pos, t_0):
window = Tk()
canvas = Canvas(window, height=700, width=1000)
canvas.pack()
canvas.config(background='black')
tennis_ball = PhotoImage(file='tennis ball.png')
t = t_0
x = x_pos(t_0)
y = y_pos(t_0)
particle = canvas.create_image(x, y, image=tennis_ball)
clock = canvas.create_text(clock_place, text=round_two(t, t_0),
fill='white')
while True:
canvas.create_rectangle(x, y, x, y, outline='red')
canvas.itemconfig(clock, text=round_two(t, t_0))
t += dt
x = x_pos(t)
y = y_pos(t)
canvas.moveto(particle, x, y)
window.update()
if x == x_pos(t_0) and y == y_pos(t_0):
if t - t_0 > 100*dt:
break
time.sleep(dt)
canvas.create_text((500, 100), text='orbit duration: ' +
str(round_three(t, t_0)), fill='white')
window.mainloop()
It turns out to be quite a bit require, but here is the main completion components.
The first additional part that you need to add:
# print('the ten ball height', tennis_ball.height(), tennis_ball.width())
# tennis ball dimensions
tb_hght = tennis_ball.height()
tb_wdth = tennis_ball.width()
mid_point_x = x + tennis_ball.height() / 2
mid_point_y = y + tennis_ball.width() / 2
Secondly, also needed to add some functions to for x_pos and y_pos like this (these are just example functions to make the code work):
def x_pos(a):
# any function of t,
return 100
def y_pos(a):
# any function of t,
return 100
Furthermore, you need to call the function at the end like this:
paint_known_path(x_pos,y_pos,0)
Finally, need to add the mid_point_x and mid_point_y to the path that is drawn (as these will be the image centre points).

ipycanvas displaying final stroke_lines thoughout animation

So I was playing with animating some Bezier curves - just part of learning how to use ipycanvas (0,10,2) -- The animation I produced is really hurting my head. What I expected to see was a set of straight lines between 4 Bezier control points "bouncing" around the canvas with the Bezier curve moving along with them.
I did get the moving Bezier curve -- BUT the control points stayed static. Even stranger they were static in the final position and the curve came to meet them.
Now sometimes Python's structures and references can get a little tricky and so you can sometimes get confusing results if you are not really thinking it through -- and this totally could be what's going on - but I am at a loss.
So to make sure I was not confused I printed the control points (pts) at the beginning and then displayed them to the canvas. This confirmed my suspicion. Through quantum tunneling or some other magic time travel the line canvas.stroke_lines(pts) reaches into the future and grabs the pts array as it will exist in the future and keeps the control points in their final state.
Every other use of pts uses the current temporal state.
So what I need to know is A) The laws of physics are safe and I am just too dumb to understand my own code. B) There is some odd bug in ipycanvas that I should report. C) How to monetize this time-traveling code -- like, could we use it to somehow factor large numbers?
from ipycanvas import Canvas, hold_canvas
import numpy as np
def rgb_to_hex(rgb):
if len(rgb) == 3:
return '#%02x%02x%02x' % rgb
elif len(rgb) == 4:
return '#%02x%02x%02x%02x' % rgb
def Bezier4(t, pts):
p = t**np.arange(0, 4,1)
M=np.matrix([[0,0,0,1],[0,0,3,-3],[0,3,-6,3],[1,-3,3,-1]])
return np.asarray((p*M*pts))
canvas = Canvas(width=800, height=800)
display(canvas) # display the canvas in the output cell..
pts = np.random.randint(50, 750, size=[4, 2]) #choose random starting point
print(pts) #print so we can compare with ending state
d = np.random.uniform(-4,4,size=[4,2]) #some random velocity vectors
c = rgb_to_hex(tuple(np.random.randint(75, 255,size=3))) #some random color
canvas.font = '16px serif' #font for displaying the changing pts array
with hold_canvas(canvas):
for ani in range(300):
#logic to bounce the points about...
for n in range(0,len(pts)):
pts[n]=pts[n] + d[n]
if pts[n][0] >= 800 or pts[n][0] <= 0 :
d[n][0] = - d[n][0]
if pts[n][1] >= 800 or pts[n][1] <= 0 :
d[n][1] = - d[n][1]
#calculate the points needed to display a bezier curve
B = [(Bezier4(i, pts)).ravel() for i in np.linspace(0,1,15)]
#begin display output....
canvas.clear()
#first draw bezier curve...
canvas.stroke_style = c
canvas.stroke_lines(B)
#Now draw control points
canvas.stroke_style = rgb_to_hex((255,255,128, 50))
canvas.stroke_lines(pts)
#print the control points to the canvas so we can see them move
canvas.stroke_style = rgb_to_hex((255,255,128, 150))
canvas.stroke_text(str(pts), 10, 32)
canvas.sleep(20)
In all seriousness, I have tried to think through what can be happening and I am coming up blank. Since ipycanvas is talking to the browser/javascript maybe all of the data for the frames are rendered first and the array used to hold the pts data for the stroke_lines ends up with the final values... Whereas the B array is recreated in each loop... It's a guess.
There are two ways to get the code to behave as expected and avoid the unsightly time-traveling code. The first way is to switch the location of the line with hold_canvas(canvas): to inside the loop. This however renders the canvas.sleep(20) line rather useless.
canvas = Canvas(width=800, height=800)
display(canvas)
pts = np.random.randint(50, 750, size=[4, 2])
print(pts)
d = np.random.uniform(-8,8,size=[4,2])
c = rgb_to_hex(tuple(np.random.randint(75, 255,size=3)))
canvas.font = '16px serif'
#with hold_canvas(canvas):
for ani in range(300):
with hold_canvas(canvas):
for n in range(0,len(pts)):
if pts[n][0] > 800 or pts[n][0] < 0 :
d[n][0] = -d[n][0]
if pts[n][1] > 800 or pts[n][1] < 50 :
d[n][1] = -d[n][1]
pts[n]=pts[n] + d[n]
B = [(Bezier4(i, pts)).ravel() for i in np.linspace(0,1,25)]
canvas.clear()
canvas.stroke_style = c
canvas.stroke_lines(B)
canvas.stroke_style = rgb_to_hex((255,255,128, 50))
#pts2 = np.copy(pts)
canvas.stroke_lines(pts)
canvas.fill_style = rgb_to_hex((255,255,255, 150))
canvas.fill_circles(pts.T[0], pts.T[1],np.array([4]*4))
canvas.stroke_style = rgb_to_hex((255,255,128, 150))
canvas.fill_text(str(pts), 10, 32)
sleep(20/1000)
#canvas.sleep(20)
In this version, the control lines are updated as expected. This version is a little more "real time" and thus the sleep(20/1000) is needed to
The other way to do it would be just to ensure that a copy of pts is made and passed to canvas.stroke_lines:
canvas = Canvas(width=800, height=800)
display(canvas)
pts = np.random.randint(50, 750, size=[4, 2])
print(pts)
d = np.random.uniform(-8,8,size=[4,2])
c = rgb_to_hex(tuple(np.random.randint(75, 255,size=3)))
canvas.font = '16px serif'
with hold_canvas(canvas):
for ani in range(300):
#with hold_canvas(canvas):
for n in range(0,len(pts)):
if pts[n][0] > 800 or pts[n][0] < 0:
d[n][0] = -d[n][0]
if pts[n][1] > 800 or pts[n][1] < 50:
d[n][1] = -d[n][1]
pts[n]=pts[n] + d[n]
B = [(Bezier4(i, pts)).ravel() for i in np.linspace(0,1,35)]
canvas.clear()
canvas.stroke_style = c
canvas.stroke_lines(B)
canvas.stroke_style = rgb_to_hex((255,255,128, 50))
pts2 = np.copy(pts)
canvas.stroke_lines(pts2)
canvas.fill_style = rgb_to_hex((255,255,255, 150))
canvas.fill_circles(pts.T[0], pts.T[1],np.array([4]*4))
canvas.stroke_style = rgb_to_hex((255,255,128, 150))
canvas.fill_text(str(pts), 10, 32)
#sleep(20/1000)
canvas.sleep(20)
I could not actually find the data passed between the python and the browser but it seems pretty logical that what is happening is that python is finishing its work (and ani loop) before sending the widget instructions on what to draw, and the pts values sent are the final ones.
(yes I know there is a bug in the bouncing logic)

Compact graph-vizualization using pydot

I would like to visualize a "linear" directed graph with the layout like that:
All the in- and out-degrees are 1 (except the first and last, of course). The length of the labels are different, so I can't calculate easily, how many nodes will fit in one row or the other. The code I have so far is this.
import networkx as nx
from networkx.drawing.nx_pydot import to_pydot
G = nx.DiGraph()
G.add_node("XYZ 1.0")
for i in range(1, 20):
G.add_node(f'XYZ 1.{i}', style='filled', fillcolor='skyblue')
G.add_edge(f'XYZ 1.{i-1}', f'XYZ 1.{i}')
# set defaults
G.graph['graph'] = {'rankdir': 'LR'}
G.graph['node'] = {'shape': 'rectangle'}
G.graph['edges'] = {'arrowsize': '4.0'}
pydt = to_pydot(G)
prog = 'dot'
file_name = f'nx_graph_{prog}.png'
pydt.write(file_name, prog=prog, format="png")
So far I use networkx in a project that needs to be run in a Python docker container, so I would like to use pydot and Networkx, if it is possible.
In some of the graphviz programs I can set coordinates if I understand correctly, but for setting coordinates I should know the widths of the boxes to avoid overlapping boxes.
I managed to find a way to do this with pydot. We can create a dot file with the coordinates with the write_dot function. Reading it back, we can get the coordinates that dot program created (and also the widths, heights). We can somehow calculate the new coordinates and modify them in the networkx Digraph. Converting again to pydot.Dot object, and at the end, we can use neato with the -n option to create the graph, that way we use the coordinates we have set. A working code can be seen below.
import networkx as nx
from networkx.drawing.nx_pydot import to_pydot
import pydot
from typing import List
G = nx.DiGraph()
G.add_node(0, label="XYZ 1.0")
for i in range(1, 20):
G.add_node(i, label=f'XYZ 1.{i}')
G.add_edge(i - 1, i)
# set defaults
G.graph['graph'] = {'rankdir': 'LR'}
G.graph['node'] = {'shape': 'rectangle'}
G.graph['edges'] = {'arrowsize': '4.0'}
pydt = to_pydot(G)
dot_data = pydt.create_dot()
pydt2 = pydot.graph_from_dot_data(dot_data.decode('utf-8'))[0]
def get_position(node):
pydot_node = pydt2.get_node(str(node))[0]
return [float(i) for i in pydot_node.get_attributes().get("pos")[1:-1].split(',')]
def fix_position(position: List, w: float = 1000, shift: float = 80):
x_orig, y_orig = position
n = int(x_orig / w)
y = y_orig - n * shift
remain_x = x_orig - n * w
if n % 2 == 0:
x = remain_x
else:
x = w - remain_x
return x, y
def refresh_coordinates_using_x():
for node in G.nodes:
position = get_position(node)
x, y = fix_position(position)
pos = f'"{x},{y}!"'
G.nodes[node]['pos'] = pos
refresh_coordinates_using_x()
pydt3 = to_pydot(G)
file_name = f'nx_graph_neato.png'
pydt3.write(file_name, prog=["neato", "-n"], format="png")
If you want to calculate the position of the nodes based on the widths, you need to know, that while the coordinates are in points, the widths are in inches. 1 inch is 72 points.
The result will be similar to this one.

ValueError: operands could not be broadcast together with shapes (3,) (0,)

My aim is to make the image1 move along the ring from its current position upto 180 degree. I have been trying to do different things but nothing seem to work. My final aim is to move both the images along the ring in different directions and finally merge them to and make them disappear.I keep getting the error above.Can you please help? Also can you tell how I can go about this problem?
from visual import *
import numpy as np
x = 3
y = 0
z = 0
i = pi/3
c = 0.120239 # A.U/minute
r = 1
for theta in arange(0, 2*pi, 0.1): #range of theta values; 0 to
xunit = r * sin(theta)*cos(i) +x
yunit = r * sin(theta)*sin(i) +y
zunit = r*cos(theta) +z
ring = curve( color = color.white ) #creates a curve
for theta in arange(0, 2*pi, 0.01):
ring.append( pos=(sin(theta)*cos(i) +x,sin(theta)*sin(i) +y,cos(theta) +z) )
image1=sphere(pos=(2.5,-0.866,0),radius=0.02, color=color.yellow)
image2=sphere(pos=(2.5,-0.866,0),radius=0.02, color=color.yellow)
earth=sphere(pos=(-3,0,-0.4),color=color.yellow, radius =0.3,material=materials.earth) #creates the observer
d_c_p = pow((x-xunit)**2 + (y-yunit)**2 + (z-zunit)**2,0.5) #calculates the distance between the center and points on ring
d_n_p = abs(yunit + 0.4998112152755791) #calculates the distance to the nearest point
t1 = ( d_c_p+d_n_p)/c
t0=d_c_p/c
t=t1-t0 #calculates the time it takes from one point to another
theta = []
t = []
dtheta = np.diff(theta) #calculates the difference in theta
dt = np.diff(t) #calculates the difference in t
speed = r*dtheta/dt #hence this calculates the speed
deltat = 0.005
t2=0
while True:
rate(5)
image2.pos = image2.pos + speed*deltat #increments the position of the image1
t2 = t2 + deltat
Your problem is that image2.pos is a vector (that's the "3" in the error message) but speed*deltat is a scalar (that's the "0" in the error message). You can't add a vector and a scalar. Instead of a scalar "speed" you need a vector velocity. There seem to be some errors in indentation in the program you posted, so there is some possibility I've misinterpreted what you're trying to do.
For VPython questions it's better to post to the VPython forum, where there are many more VPython users who will see your question than if you post to stackoverflow:
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups&hl=en#!forum/vpython-users

TkInter python - creating points on a canvas to obtain a Sierpinsky triangle

I want to make a program which plots a Sierpinsky triangle (of any modulo). In order to do it I've used TkInter. The program generates the fractal by moving a point randomly, always keeping it in the sides. After repeating the process many times, the fractal appears.
However, there's a problem. I don't know how to plot points on a canvas in TkInter. The rest of the program is OK, but I had to "cheat" in order to plot the points by drawing small lines instead of points. It works more or less, but it doesn't have as much resolution as it could have.
Is there a function to plot points on a canvas, or another tool to do it (using Python)? Ideas for improving the rest of the program are also welcome.
Thanks. Here's what I have:
from tkinter import *
import random
import math
def plotpoint(x, y):
global canvas
point = canvas.create_line(x-1, y-1, x+1, y+1, fill = "#000000")
x = 0 #Initial coordinates
y = 0
#x and y will always be in the interval [0, 1]
mod = int(input("What is the modulo of the Sierpinsky triangle that you want to generate? "))
points = int(input("How many points do you want the triangle to have? "))
tkengine = Tk() #Window in which the triangle will be generated
window = Frame(tkengine)
window.pack()
canvas = Canvas(window, height = 700, width = 808, bg = "#FFFFFF") #The dimensions of the canvas make the triangle look equilateral
canvas.pack()
for t in range(points):
#Procedure for placing the points
while True:
#First, randomly choose one of the mod(mod+1)/2 triangles of the first step. a and b are two vectors which point to the chosen triangle. a goes one triangle to the right and b one up-right. The algorithm gives the same probability to every triangle, although it's not efficient.
a = random.randint(0,mod-1)
b = random.randint(0,mod-1)
if a + b < mod:
break
#The previous point is dilated towards the origin of coordinates so that the big triangle of step 0 becomes the small one at the bottom-left of step one (divide by modulus). Then the vectors are added in order to move the point to the same place in another triangle.
x = x / mod + a / mod + b / 2 / mod
y = y / mod + b / mod
#Coordinates [0,1] converted to pixels, for plotting in the canvas.
X = math.floor(x * 808)
Y = math.floor((1-y) * 700)
plotpoint(X, Y)
tkengine.mainloop()
If you are wanting to plot pixels, a canvas is probably the wrong choice. You can create a PhotoImage and modify individual pixels. It's a little slow if you plot each individual pixel, but you can get dramatic speedups if you only call the put method once for each row of the image.
Here's a complete example:
from tkinter import *
import random
import math
def plotpoint(x, y):
global the_image
the_image.put(('#000000',), to=(x,y))
x = 0
y = 0
mod = 3
points = 100000
tkengine = Tk() #Window in which the triangle will be generated
window = Frame(tkengine)
window.pack()
the_image = PhotoImage(width=809, height=700)
label = Label(window, image=the_image, borderwidth=2, relief="raised")
label.pack(fill="both", expand=True)
for t in range(points):
while True:
a = random.randint(0,mod-1)
b = random.randint(0,mod-1)
if a + b < mod:
break
x = x / mod + a / mod + b / 2 / mod
y = y / mod + b / mod
X = math.floor(x * 808)
Y = math.floor((1-y) * 700)
plotpoint(X, Y)
tkengine.mainloop()
You can use canvas.create_oval with the same coordinates for the two corners of the bounding box:
from tkinter import *
import random
import math
def plotpoint(x, y):
global canvas
# point = canvas.create_line(x-1, y-1, x+1, y+1, fill = "#000000")
point = canvas.create_oval(x, y, x, y, fill="#000000", outline="#000000")
x = 0 #Initial coordinates
y = 0
#x and y will always be in the interval [0, 1]
mod = int(input("What is the modulo of the Sierpinsky triangle that you want to generate? "))
points = int(input("How many points do you want the triangle to have? "))
tkengine = Tk() #Window in which the triangle will be generated
window = Frame(tkengine)
window.pack()
canvas = Canvas(window, height = 700, width = 808, bg = "#FFFFFF") #The dimensions of the canvas make the triangle look equilateral
canvas.pack()
for t in range(points):
#Procedure for placing the points
while True:
#First, randomly choose one of the mod(mod+1)/2 triangles of the first step. a and b are two vectors which point to the chosen triangle. a goes one triangle to the right and b one up-right. The algorithm gives the same probability to every triangle, although it's not efficient.
a = random.randint(0,mod-1)
b = random.randint(0,mod-1)
if a + b < mod:
break
#The previous point is dilated towards the origin of coordinates so that the big triangle of step 0 becomes the small one at the bottom-left of step one (divide by modulus). Then the vectors are added in order to move the point to the same place in another triangle.
x = x / mod + a / mod + b / 2 / mod
y = y / mod + b / mod
#Coordinates [0,1] converted to pixels, for plotting in the canvas.
X = math.floor(x * 808)
Y = math.floor((1-y) * 700)
plotpoint(X, Y)
tkengine.mainloop()
with a depth of 3 and 100,000 points, this gives:
Finally found a solution: if a 1x1 point is to be placed in pixel (x,y), a command which does it exactly is:
point = canvas.create_line(x, y, x+1, y+1, fill = "colour")
The oval is a good idea for 2x2 points.
Something remarkable about the original program is that it uses a lot of RAM if every point is treated as a separate object.

Resources