Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.programming > #355
| From | Michael Schmid <michael.schmid@geod.baug.ethz.ch> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.programming |
| Subject | I like noise |
| Date | 2011-05-24 08:32 +0200 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <irfje0$308$1@speranza.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | <ir5u4m$4sr$1@aspen.stu.neva.ru> <C9ydnarj6eAlEUrQnZ2dnUVZ7vudnZ2d@bt.com> <irdn0t$id3$1@speranza.aioe.org> <qNadnRAWDK0a9UfQnZ2dnUVZ8qSdnZ2d@bt.com> |
… well, usually not, but in this case I do. The results are different than those from the closest-pair approach, but comparable in quality. When I sum up the distances between the selected points, sometimes one method is slightly better, sometimes the other, depending on the point set and the number of points to be selected. However, the noise implementation runs about five times faster. The speed benefit is more significant the more points are excluded, as with the noise algorithm, only a few summations take place in every iteration, whereas the closest-pair approach does quite a bit more. But even with only one point to remove, the noise approach is faster. Furthermore, it is more straightforward to implement, without need for sophisticated algorithms to find the closest pair or the k nearest neighbors. I tried out both inverse-distance and inverse-square-distance functions, and found that the inverse-square gives better results, but I don’t exactly know why.
Back to comp.programming | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Select well-distributed points from ill-distributed set Michael Schmid <michael.schmid@geod.baug.ethz.ch> - 2011-05-20 16:26 +0200
Re: Select well-distributed points from ill-distributed set James Waldby <not@valid.invalid> - 2011-05-20 15:25 +0000
Convex hull presents difficulties Michael Schmid <michael.schmid@geod.baug.ethz.ch> - 2011-05-23 15:02 +0200
Re: Select well-distributed points from ill-distributed set "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2011-05-21 10:56 +0100
Closest-pair approach works fine Michael Schmid <michael.schmid@geod.baug.ethz.ch> - 2011-05-23 15:21 +0200
Re: Closest-pair approach works fine "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2011-05-23 14:49 +0100
I like noise Michael Schmid <michael.schmid@geod.baug.ethz.ch> - 2011-05-24 08:32 +0200
Re: I like noise Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-05-24 20:18 -0700
Re: Select well-distributed points from ill-distributed set jebblue <n@n.nnn> - 2011-05-22 00:30 -0500
csiph-web