• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Abstract Current morphometric strategies that comprehensively measure form can not examine the disparate leaf shapes present in seed plants and are delicate to processing artifacts. We explore using persistent homology, a topological methodology applied as a filtration across simplicial complexes (or more merely, a method to measure topological features of areas throughout totally different spatial resolutions), to overcome these limitations. The described method isolates subsets of shape options and measures the spatial relationship of neighboring pixel densities in a shape. We apply the method to the analysis of 182,707 leaves, both revealed and unpublished, representing 141 plant households collected from seventy five sites all through the world. By measuring leaves from all through the seed plants using persistent homology, a defined morphospace comparing all leaves is demarcated. Clear variations in shape between major phylogenetic teams are detected and estimates of leaf form diversity within plant families are made. The strategy predicts plant family above probability. The application of a persistent homology technique, using topological features, to measure leaf form permits for a unified morphometric framework to measure plant type, together with shapes, textures, patterns, and branching architectures.

Flood fill, additionally referred to as seed fill, is a flooding algorithm that determines and alters the area linked to a given node in a multi-dimensional array with some matching attribute. It is used in the "bucket" fill software of paint programs to fill related, similarly-colored areas with a distinct coloration, and in games reminiscent of Go and blowjob Minesweeper for determining which pieces are cleared. A variant known as boundary fill uses the same algorithms however is outlined as the area related to a given node that doesn't have a selected attribute. Note that flood filling will not be appropriate for drawing crammed polygons, as it is going to miss some pixels in more acute corners. Instead, see Even-odd rule and Nonzero-rule. The traditional flood-fill algorithm takes three parameters: a start node, a target colour, and a substitute coloration. The algorithm looks for all nodes in the array which might be linked to the start node by a path of the target colour and modifications them to the alternative coloration.

For a boundary-fill, in place of the goal shade, a border color could be equipped. With a purpose to generalize the algorithm in the frequent approach, the following descriptions will instead have two routines available. One known as Inside which returns true for unfilled points that, by their colour, could be inside the filled area, and one referred to as Set which fills a pixel/node. Any node that has Set referred to as on it should then now not be Inside. Depending on whether we consider nodes touching on the corners connected or not, we've two variations: eight-approach and 4-approach respectively. Though simple to grasp, the implementation of the algorithm used above is impractical in languages and environments the place stack house is severely constrained (e.g. Microcontrollers). Moving the recursion into an information structure (both a stack or a queue) prevents a stack overflow. Check and set each node's pixel coloration earlier than including it to the stack/queue, lowering stack/queue measurement.

Use a loop for the east/west instructions, queuing pixels above/beneath as you go (making it similar to the span filling algorithms, under). Interleave two or extra copies of the code with extra stacks/queues, to allow out-of-order processors extra opportunity to parallelize. Use multiple threads (ideally with barely completely different visiting orders, so they don't keep in the identical area). Quite simple algorithm - simple to make bug-free. Uses a lot of memory, significantly when utilizing a stack. Tests most crammed pixels a complete of 4 times. Not suitable for pattern filling, because it requires pixel take a look at outcomes to vary. Access pattern isn't cache-friendly, for the queuing variant. Cannot easily optimize for multi-pixel phrases or bitplanes. It's potential to optimize issues additional by working primarily with spans, a row with fixed y. The first published full instance works on the following primary precept. 1. Starting with a seed level, fill left and proper.

Keep track of the leftmost filled level lx and rightmost crammed level rx. This defines the span. 2. Scan from lx to rx above and under the seed level, looking out for new seed points to continue with. As an optimisation, the scan algorithm does not need restart from every seed point, however only those initially of the following span. Using a stack explores spans depth first, while a queue explores spans breadth first. When a brand new scan would be entirely within a grandparent span, it will certainly only discover crammed pixels, and so wouldn't need queueing. Further, when a new scan overlaps a grandparent span, solely the overhangs (U-turns and W-turns) have to be scanned. 2-8x faster than the pixel-recursive algorithm. Access sample is cache and bitplane-friendly. Can draw a horizontal line reasonably than setting particular person pixels. Still visits pixels it has already stuffed. For the popular algorithm, 3 scans of most pixels. Not suitable for pattern filling, as it requires pixel take a look at results to change.