Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cgal-discuss - Re: [cgal-discuss] which operation is more efficient when proccsing with large size Delaunay_triangulation_3

Subject: CGAL users discussion list

List archive

Re: [cgal-discuss] which operation is more efficient when proccsing with large size Delaunay_triangulation_3


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Daniel Duque <>
  • To:
  • Subject: Re: [cgal-discuss] which operation is more efficient when proccsing with large size Delaunay_triangulation_3
  • Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 14:08:40 +0100
  • Organization: UPM

Hello,

This is actually a crucial question for people who use evolving
triangulations. They may evolve following some time evolution, or in some
geometrical procedure (e.g. Lloyd's algorithm for centroidal Voronoi
tessellations). I am currently using both!

On Friday 11 December 2009 13:31:51 Pedro Machado Manhães de Castro wrote:
> As far as I understood, you are within a static setting since you know the
> next position of all the points, and all your points move.

This is often the case: the new positions are known for all points. Sometimes
you would move them one at a time (as is Monte Carlo dynamics, which I am not
currently doing).

> Then, in general, your approach (2) is better (rebuilding).

But, sometimes the new points will be fairly close to the old ones. AFAIK,
this would mean that perhaps moving each of the points to its new (close-by)
location could be more efficient. There are two ways to do this: erase the
old
point, insert the new one; or, insert then erase. I am currently using the
(undocumented?) T.move( ) function (in Delaunay 2D triangulations), which
does
one of the two (I think the later, but I may be wrong).

Daniel




--
http://debin.etsin.upm.es/~daniel



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page