simplification

问题 I need to prepare 3D mesh of car seat to further dynamic analysis. Because the mesh has high resolution it is necessity to make a simplification using one of the available options in MeshLab. What module I have to use to get the mesh with lower resolution in places where the faces are simple (regular, simple surfaces) but higher resolution where details must be preserved (curvatures, folds, bends). The screen of the object I attach to this message. enter image description here Thank you for

问题 All of you comfortable with example and elaborations in git log's help for history simplification? I encounter some burdens on understanding when using this help/manual and the named example. .-A---M---N---O---P---Q / / / / / / I B C D E Y \ / / / / / `-------------' X I is the initial commit... foo exists with contents “asdf”, and a file quux exists with contents “quux”.... In A, foo contains just “foo”... B contains the same change as A... C does not change foo, but its merge N changes it

问题 Ok, so this is a common scenario. You have an html form that involves editing information. The original information comes from the database. When you post the form, it may not save the information immediately, because something may need fixing when the data-checking is done, maybe one of the required fields is left blank. As a result, you want to redisplay the form field, but if there was post data, display the post data, if not, display the original data from the database. So I created a

问题 in Maxima, how is it possible to simply equations that are components of a matrix? I have a rather big matrix and want to simplify the components of it (e.g. factor out and cancel out). Thanks. 回答1: Most functions (where appropriate) already thread over lists, matrices, equations, etc... For example: (%i1) a : [[cos(x)^2+sin(x)^2,1],[0,sin(x)*cos(x)]]; 2 2 (%o1) [[sin (x) + cos (x), 1], [0, cos(x) sin(x)]] (%i2) trigsimp(a); (%o2) [[1, 1], [0, cos(x) sin(x)]] (%i3) trigreduce(a); cos(2 x) + 1

问题 I know that boolean satisfiability is NP-Complete, but is the minimization/simplification of a boolean expression, by which I mean taking a given expression in symbolic form and producing an equivalent but simplified expression in symbolic form, NP-Complete? I'm not sure that there's a reduction from satisfiability to minimization, but I feel like there probably is. Does anyone know for sure? 回答1: Well, look at it this way: using a minimizing algorithm, you can compact any non-satisfiable

问题 I'm trying to implement a polyline simplification algorithm. The original article can be found here: http://archive.is/Tzq2. It seems straightforward in concept but I don't understand the sample algorithm (I think it's poorly worded) pseudocode supplied and was hoping someone could provide some insight. From the article, I gathered that the basic idea is to Calculate the effective area (formed by the triangle between three consecutive points on a line) for each point and delete those with 0

问题 My task is to develop a rational class. If 500 and 1000 are my inputs, then (½) must be my output. I have written a program on my own to find it. Is there another best way to find the solution, or my program is already the best one? public class Rational { public static void main(String[] args){ int n1 = Integer.parseInt(args[0]); int n2 = Integer.parseInt(args[1]); int temp1 = n1; int temp2 = n2; while (n1 != n2){ if(n1 > n2) n1 = n1 - n2; else n2 = n2 - n1; } int n3 = temp1 / n1 ; int n4 =

问题 Is there any tool or library in java which simplifies a boolean expression formula and gives result. when inputs are like that, exp = (a || a' ) result = 1 exp = ( a || b ) && ( a' || b ) result = b (after simplification) Expressions can be larger or more complex than above. 回答1: IntelliJ supports "intentions" which allow you to simplify boolean expressions within the editor. Alternatively, PMD can report these kind of errors for you (see the boolean rules) 来源： https://stackoverflow.com

问题 I came across a proof that I could not easily automate until I threw this lemma into Isabelle’s simplifier set: lemma ex_ex_eq_hint: "(∃x. (∃xs ys. x = f xs ys ∧ P xs ys) ∧ Q x) ⟷ (∃xs ys. Q (f xs ys) ∧ P xs ys)" by auto Now I am wondering: Is there a good reason why the simplifier or the classical reasoner is not able perform this simplification in general and automatically? Is there a more general form of this lemma that could be added to the default simpset to achieve this? 回答1: In

问题 Similarly to this other question, I wonder which C# mesh-simplification libraries are available out there. My (I believe common) problem is to reduce the computational effort of rendering .stl meshes . 回答1: Humm... There is a person that created is own geometry library and aparently it is already done. The goals of this library seems to be what you are looking for: Implement basic geometric primitives and polygon mesh processing. Based on a robust numerical foundation. Target the .NET