Convex hull on set of squares

Imagine a set of two to six squares within 3D-space. The goal is to generate a convex hull around these squares as efficiently as possible.

The following constraints are known:

  • Each of the two to six squares consists out of 4 vertices (a vertex being a 3D-vector).
  • Each vertex will be part of the convex hull (none of them will be on the "inside").
  • During the creation of the convex hull vertices may not be connected to other vertices from within the same square (otherwise the squares would "degenerate").

Is there an especially fast/efficient way to create a convex hull for this very specific geometry?

Convex Hull of Unit Circles

(Posted this also on Math StackExchange but I’m not sure if it belong there or here).

I know that if we’re trying to get the convex hull of unit circles, we can simply shrink the circles down to their centers and consider the convex hull of their centers, but I’m trying to prove some intermediate steps towards that.

a) Show that boundary of the convex hull consists of only straight line segments and parts of circles.

b) Show that each circle an appear at most once in the boundary of the convex hull.

(This is from de Berg’s Computational Geometry book.)

I sort of have an intuition of why these are true, but my problem is that whenever I try to come up with a solution, I end up considering lots of cases, and I feel like it’s not rigorous or elegant enough because of so many cases. Is there a neat way to prove these?

(Note: I know that this has been posted before in, but I’m not satisfied with the answers there, and I’m trying to go for something more rigorous.)

Generate triangular surface mesh of convex hull spanned by 8 points in 3D-Space

I am looking for a numerically efficient algorithm to get a triangular surface mesh of the convex hull given by 8 points in three-dimensional space.

For context, the use case is the following:

I have a numerical Simulation calculating the time evolution of a field with three components on a lattice. Say we have lattice coordinates $ (i,j,k)$ , then every lattice point $ (i,j,k)$ has a field vector $ (\phi_1, \phi_2 , \phi_3)$ attached.

For relevant physics, I need to now take unit cells on my lattice, so the 8 corners of a little cube of my lattice. I take the field vectors $ (\phi_1, \phi_2 , \phi_3)$ of every corner of my unit cell and then interpret their convex hull as a closed volume in $ \phi$ -space, with $ \phi$ -space being the 3D space given by the $ (\phi_1,\phi_2,\phi_3)$ coordinates.

I am now interested if the volume spanned by these 8 points in $ \phi$ -space does the following things:

  1. If it contains the origin, $ (0 ,0 ,0 )$

  2. If a Ray traveling from the origin in $ (-1,0,0)$ -direction pierces my given volume

The idea to evaluate both 1.) and 2.) at the same time is to decompose the surface of the convex hull into triangles. For a triangle in 3-Dimensional space, it is easy to evaluate whether it is pierced by my given Ray in $ (-1,0,0)$ direction. I can then count how many triangles are pierced. If exactly two triangles are pierced (because of convexity), I know the cell satisfies condition 2.). If exactly one triangle is pierced, I know the origin has to lie inside my volume, that is condition 1.) is satisfied. Lastly, when no triangles are pierced, none of the above apply.

I think this approach is probably relatively fast. Speed is critical, because I have approximately $ 10^6 … 10^9$ cells to evaluate per sweep across my lattice.

I’d be interested in any other approaches as well, though.

Update: So, I think possibly a 3D-Gift-Wrapping algorithm would atleast produce the required result, because it creates the convex hull by consecutively finding triangles on the surface? I will have to try that out tomorrow.

Can I do better than that in terms of efficiency?

How to compute the convex hull in linear time of the number of points on it?

I must construct 2 functions. The first function is used to add a point passed to it to an arraylist. The second function must take this arraylist, find out the set of points that lie on the convex hull formed from them, and return a linked list of those points.

How can I achieve this in a O(h) time (worst case), given that h is the number of points on the convex hull, NOT n which is the number of points originally present in the arraylist.

The two functions can have different worst case running time but most importantly, non should have a worst case that takes more than O(h).

I made it to O(n), not further though!

Describing hull of vertex intersections of two convex bounded polytopes?

We have two convex bounded polytopes $ P_1$ and $ P_2$ where

a. $ P_2\subseteq P_1$

b. $ \mathcal{V}(P_2)\cap\mathcal{V}(P_1)\neq\emptyset$ .

  1. Is there a name for the polytope $ P=\mbox{Conv}(\mathcal{V}(P_2)\cap\mathcal{V}(P_1))$ ?

  2. Is there a polynomial time algorithm to describe $ P$ by half-spaces

Note $ \mathcal{V}(P_2)\cap\mathcal{V}(P_1)=\emptyset\iff P=\emptyset$ .

Convex hull partition of a set of points

Given a set $ S$ of $ n$ points in $ \mathbb R^2$ , denote by $ \mathrm{conv}(S)$ the convex hull of $ S$ . Let \begin{align*} S_1 &= \mathrm{conv}(S)\ S_{i+1} &= \mathrm{conv}\left(S \setminus \bigcup_{j=1}^i S_j\right). \end{align*}

Now $ S_1,\ldots$ forms a partition of $ S$ . Is there an $ O(n\log n)$ time algorithm for computing this partition?

algorithm to compute the convex hull of a set of m possibly intersecting convex polygons in the plane

I am trying to find an algorithm to compute the convex hull of a set of m possibly intersecting convex polygons in the plane, with a total of n vertices. Let h denote the number of vertices on the boundary of the desired convex hull. The algorithm should run in O(mh+n) time

Classifying Radon partitions in $\mathbb{R}^n$ whose affine hull is $\mathbb{R}^n$

Specifically, I want to determine all distinct “types” of Radon partitions of $ n+2$ points in $ \mathbb{R}^n$ for which the affine hull is all of $ \mathbb{R}^n$ . This is a homework question, so I’m primarily looking for advice on getting started.

Radon’s theorem states that any set of $ n+2$ points in $ \mathbb{R}^n$ can be partitioned into two disjoint sets with intersecting convex hulls.

The affine hull of a set $ S$ is given by $ $ \mbox{aff}(S)=\left\{\sum_{i=1}^k\alpha_ix_i:k>0,x_i\in S,\alpha_i\in\mathbb{R},\sum_{i=1}^k\alpha_i=1\right\}.$ $

So, the simplest case is when $ n=1$ , and clearly the affine hull of any Radon partition of $ n+2=3$ points in $ \mathbb{R}$ is all of $ \mathbb{R}$ . When $ n=2$ , the $ n+2=4$ points can be partitioned as a triple and a singleton or two pairs of points. In the case of the former, the convex hull of the triple must contain the singleton. In the case of the latter, the pairs of points must form intersecting line segments. But the former is the only “type” of partition I want to consider, as it’s affine hull is in fact $ \mathbb{R}^2$ , but the affine hull of the partitions in the latter is not all of $ \mathbb{R}^2$ . So I might conjecture that the full classification requires that the convex hull of one of the partitions must be fully contained in the convex hull of the other partition, but I’m not sure if I even believe this intuitively.

Thanks in advance for any advice.

Количество контрольных точек в HULL шейдере

На данный момент я изучаю шейдеры и сейчас остановился на hull/domain shaders. Я не смог найти нужную информацию, из-за чего у меня появилась небольшая путаница: почему hull шейдер может принимать и отдавать больше контрольных точек, чем в примитиве, с которым он работает?

Пример c MSDN:

#define MAX_POINTS 32  [domain("quad")] [partitioning("integer")] [outputtopology("triangle_cw")] [outputcontrolpoints(16)] [patchconstantfunc("SubDToBezierConstantsHS")] BEZIER_CONTROL_POINT SubDToBezierHS(      InputPatch<VS_CONTROL_POINT_OUTPUT, MAX_POINTS> ip,      uint i : SV_OutputControlPointID,     uint PatchID : SV_PrimitiveID ) {     VS_CONTROL_POINT_OUTPUT Output;      // Insert code to compute Output here.      return Output; } 

Почему здесь используется 32 контрольные точки в качестве входных данных и 16 в качестве выходных, а не 4 точки для обоих случаев?