seeking approximate algorithm to find largest clear circle in an area

492 views Asked by At

Related: Is there a simple algorithm for calculating the maximum inscribed circle into a convex polygon?

I'm writing a graphics program whose goals are artistic rather than mathematical. It composes a picture step by step, using geometric primitives such as line segments or arcs of small angle. As it goes, it looks for open areas to fill in with more detail; as the available open areas get smaller, the detail gets finer, so it's loosely fractal.

At a given step, in order to decide what to do next, we want to find out: where is the largest circular area that's still free of existing geometric primitives?

Some constraints of the problem

  • It does not need to be exact. A close-enough answer is fine.
  • Imprecision should err on the conservative side: an almost-maximal circle is acceptable, but a circle that's not quite empty isn't acceptable.
  • CPU efficiency is a priority, because it will be called often.
  • The program will run in a browser, so memory efficiency is a priority too.
  • I'll have to set a limit on level of detail, constrained presumably by memory space.
  • We can keep track of the primitives already drawn in any way desired, e.g. a spatial index. Exactness of these is not required; e.g. storing bounding boxes instead of arcs would be OK. However the more precision we have, the better, because it will allow the program to draw to a higher level of detail. But, given that the number of primitives can increase exponentially with the level of detail, we'd like storage of past detail not to increase linearly with the number of primitives.

To summarize the order of priorities

  1. Memory efficiency
  2. CPU efficiency
  3. Precision

P.S.

I framed this question in terms of circles, but if it's easier to find the largest clear golden rectangle (or golden ellipse), that would work too.

P.P.S.

This image gives some idea of what I'm trying to achieve. Here is the start of a tendril-drawing program, in which decisions about where to sprout a tendril, and how big, are made without regard to remaining open space. But now we want to know, where is there room to draw a tendril next, and how big? And where after that?

tendrils drawn within a circle

3

There are 3 answers

2
Edward Doolittle On

This seems like the kind of situation where a randomized algorithm might be helpful. Choose points at random, reject and choose more if they're inappropriate for some reason, then find the min distance from your choices to each of the figures already included. The random point with the max of the mins would be your choice.

The number of sample points might have to increase as the complexity of the figure increases.

The random algorithm could be improved by checking points nearby good choices. Keep checking neighbors until no more improvement is possible.

5
j_random_hacker On

Here's a simple way that uses a fixed amount of memory and time per update, regardless of how many drawing primitives you use. How much memory (and time per update) is needed can be controlled according to how high a "resolution" you need:

  1. Divide the space up into a grid of points. We will maintain a 2D array, d[], which records the minimum distance from the grid point (x, y) to any already-drawn primitive in the entry d[x, y]. Initially, set every element in this array to infinity (or some huge number).
  2. Whenever you draw some primitive, iterate over all grid points (x, y) calculating the minimum distance (or some conservative approximation to it) from (x, y) to the just-drawn primitive. E.g., if the primitive just drawn was a circle of radius r centered at (p, q), then this distance would be sqrt((x-p)^2 + (y-q)^2) - r. Then update d[x, y] with this new distance value if it is smaller than its current value.
  3. The grid point at which the largest circle can be drawn without touching any already-drawn primitive is the grid point that is the farthest away from any primitive drawn so far. To find it, simply scan through d[] to find its maximum value, and note the corresponding indices (x, y). d[x, y] will be the maximum radius you could safely use for this circle.

Repeat steps 2 and 3 as necessary.

A couple of points:

  • For primitives that have area, you can assign 0 or a negative value to all d[x, y] corresponding to grid points inside the primitive.
  • For any convex primitive, you can often avoid updating most of the d[] array by scanning rows (or columns) "outward" from the just-drawn primitive's border: the distance from the current grid point to the primitive will never decrease, so if this distance becomes larger than the previous maximum value in d[] then we know that we can stop scanning this row, because no further distance value that we would compute on it could possibly be less than an existing distance on it.
0
mcdowella On

One very efficient way would be to recursively divide your area into rectangular sub-areas, splitting them when necessary to divide occupied areas from unoccupied areas. Then you would simply need to keep track of the largest unoccupied area at each time. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadtree - but you needn't split into squares.

Given any rectangle, you can draw a line inside it, so that at least one of the rectangles to either side of the line is a golden rectangle. Therefore you can recursively erect partitions within a rectangle so that all but one of the rectangles formed by the partitions are golden rectangles, and the add rectangle left over is vanishingly small. You could do this to create a quadtree-like structure, where almost all of the rectangles left over were golden rectangles.