Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content

An input-size/output-size trade-off in the time-complexity of rectilinear hidden surface removal

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP 1990)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 443))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

We present an algorithm for the hidden-surface elimination problem for rectangles, which is also known as window rendering. The time complexity of our algorithm is dependent on both the number of input rectangles, n, and on the size of the output, κ. Our algorithm obtains a trade-off between these two components, in that its running time is O(r(n 1+1/r+κ)), where 1≤r≤log n is a tunable parameter. By using this method while adjusting the parameter r “on the fly” one can achieve a running time that is O(n log n+κ(log n/log(1+κ/n))). Note that when κ is Θ(n), this achieves an O(n log n) running time, and when κ is Θ(n 1+ε) for any positive constant ɛ, then this achieves an O(κ) running time, both of which are optimal.

Preliminary Version

This author's research was supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant CCR-8810568 and by the NSF and DARPA under Grant CCR-8908092.

This author's research was supported by the Office of Naval Research under Grants N00014-84-K-0502 and N00014-86-K-0689, and the National Science Foundation under Grant DCR-8451393, and the National Library of Medicine under Grant R01-LM05118. Part of this research was carried out while this author was visiting the Research Institute for Advanced Computer Science, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California.

This author's research was partially supported by the ESPRIT II Basic Research Actions Program of the EC, under contract No. 3075 (project ALCOM).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. J.L. Bentley and D. Wood, “An Optimal Worst Case Algorithm for Reporting Intersections of Rectangles,” IEEE Trans. on Computers, Vol. C-29, 1980, 571–577.

    Google Scholar 

  2. M. Bern, “Hidden Surface Removal for Rectangles,” Proc. 4th ACM Symp. on Computational Geometry, 1988, 183–192.

    Google Scholar 

  3. B. Chazelle, “Filtering Search: A New Approach to Query-Answering,” SIAM J. Comput., Vol. 15, 1986, 703–724.

    Google Scholar 

  4. B. Chazelle, “Intersecting is Easier Than Sorting,” 16th ACM Symp. on Theory of Comp., 1984, pp. 125–134.

    Google Scholar 

  5. J.I. Doh, “Visibility Problems for Orthogonal Objects in Two-or Three-Dimensions,” to appear in The Visual Computer.

    Google Scholar 

  6. M.T. Goodrich, “A Polygonal Approach to Hidden-Line Elimination,” Proc. of 25th Annual Allerton Conference on Comm., Control, and Computing, 1987, 849–858.

    Google Scholar 

  7. R.H. Güting and T. Ottmann, “New Algorithms For Special Cases of the Hidden Line Elimination Problem,” Computer Vision, Graphics, and Image Processing, Vol. 40, 1987, 188–204.

    Google Scholar 

  8. L. Larmore, “An Optimal Query-Update Structure for the Interval Valuation Problem,” manuscript, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  9. M. McKenna, “Worst-case Optimal Hidden-Surface Removal,” ACM Transactions on Graphics, Vol. 6, 1987, 19–28.

    Google Scholar 

  10. K. Mehlhorn, private communication, October 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  11. O. Nurmi, “A Fast Line-Sweep Algorithm For Hidden Line Elimination,” BIT, Vol. 25, 1985, 466–472.

    Google Scholar 

  12. M. Paterson, private communication, October 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  13. F.P. Preparata, J.S. Vitter, and M. Yvinec, “Computation of the Axial View of a Set of Isothetic Parallelepipeds,” Laboratoire d'Informatique de L'Ecole Normal Supérieure, Départment de Mathématiques et d'Informatique, Report LIENS-88-1, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  14. A. Schmitt, “On the Time and Space Complexity of Certain Exact Hidden Line Algorithms,” Universität Karlsruhe, Fakultät für Informatik, Report 24/81, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  15. I.E. Sutherland, R.F. Sproull, and R.A. Schumacker, “A Characterization of Ten Hidden-Surface Algorithms,” Computing Surveys, Vol. 6, 1974, 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  16. P. van Emde Boas, “Presevering Order in a Forest in Less than Logarithmic Time and Linear Space,” Information Processing Letters, Vol. 6, 1977, 80–82.

    Google Scholar 

  17. P. van Emde Boas, R. Kaas, and E. Zijlstra, “Design and Implementation of an Efficient Priority Queue,” Math. Systems Theory, Vol. 10, 1977, 99–127.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Michael S. Paterson

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1990 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Goodrich, M.T., Atallah, M.J., Overmars, M.H. (1990). An input-size/output-size trade-off in the time-complexity of rectilinear hidden surface removal. In: Paterson, M.S. (eds) Automata, Languages and Programming. ICALP 1990. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 443. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0032067

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0032067

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-52826-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-47159-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics