It's been a bit longer than usual so I thought that an update was in order. I've been working on implementing an algorithm that generates Hilbert curves for arbitrary rectangular regions and I've been having issues. The paper that describes the algorithm is

Zhang, Kamata, Ueshige "

*A Pseudo-Hilbert Scan for Arbitrarily-Sized Arrays*"

The problems I've been having aren't so much related to my understanding of the problem, it's coming up with a understandable, fast piece of code to generate the curve (while finding time for sleep and work). I'm using python so I could increase the speed by going to C for some parts, but I've worked on my implementation until it generates a curve for a 3000 by 2000 area in about 20 seconds. I think that's a reasonable speed. The plan was to hold off on this post until I'd solved it. It forces me to work and sets a deadline to meet. The code reached a point last night that I was happy with and I was ready to post and then I compared my results with the curves in the paper. Guess what, they don't match. I know why and I'll get to that later but first an explanation of the algorithm.

The first step is to recursively divide the region vertically and horizontally. In the small example below the region is divided into 4 blocks vertically and 4 blocks horizontally. There will always be an equal number of blocks vertically and horizontally and it will be a power of two. These blocks determine the general direction of the curve as they can be easily traversed by a Hilbert curve. The division algorithm also ensures that the dimensions of each block in all but the bottom and left rows will be a power of two.

Partition a 17 x 15 Region into Blocks |

The next step is to determine a scanning method for each block. The way the sides are divided makes this step easier. Depending on the oddness or evenness of the each of the dimensions some block scanning methods are determined by a simple lookup process. Others are a bit more complicated.

Scanning methods |

Once you know the size of the blocks, their location, and their scanning method, the curve can be easily generated.

Here's where things went wrong. My curves match the curves in the paper for some sections but not others. Bellow are a couple example of my curve vs the one from the paper and an overlay to show where they match and where they differ.

My version of a 123 x 97 curve |

The 123 x 97 curve in the paper |

Overlay of the two curves to see where they differ |

My version of the 125 x 88 curve |

The version of the 125 x 88 curve from the paper |

Overlay of the two curves to see where they differ |

I was scratching my head trying to figure out why, and after a bit of research I discovered that the author later made some optimisations to the scan methods for blocks larger than or equal to 4x4. The images in the paper were generated with that method. Basically larger blocks are scanned with a Hilbert like method and not the bidirectional raster scans shown above. So I'm not losing my mind. Well, not for that reason anyway. I need to think about how to alter my code to make this work. Hmmm.

My other blog posts on the hilbert curve can be found here.

Calculating Hilbert Curve Coordinates

## No comments:

## Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.