Search Results

Search found 1655 results on 67 pages for 'detection'.

Page 1/67 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • per pixel based collision detection.

    - by pengume
    I was wondering if anyone had any ideas on how to get per pixel collision detection for the android. I saw that the andEngine has great collision detection on rotation as well but couldn't see where the actual detection happened per pixel. Also noticed a couple solutions for java, could these be replicated for use with the Android SDK? Maybe someone here has a clean piece of code I could look at to help understand what is going on with per pixel detection and also why when rotating it is a different process.

    Read the article

  • Collision detection with curves

    - by paldepind
    I'm working on a 2D game in which I would like to do collision detection between a moving circle and some kind of static curves (maybe Bezier curves). Currently my game features only straight lines as the static geometry and I'm doing the collision detection by calculating the distance from the circle to the lines, and projecting the circle out of the line in case the distance is less than the circles radius. How can I do this kind of collision detection in a relative straightforward way? I know for instance that Box2D features collision detection with Bezier curves. I don't need a full featured collision detection mechanism, just something that can do what I've described.

    Read the article

  • Need some advice regarding collision detection with the sprite changing its width and height

    - by Frank Scott
    So I'm messing around with collision detection in my tile-based game and everything works fine and dandy using this method. However, now I am trying to implement sprite sheets so my character can have a walking and jumping animation. For one, I'd like to to be able to have each frame of variable size, I think. I want collision detection to be accurate and during a jumping animation the sprite's height will be shorter (because of the calves meeting the hamstrings). Again, this also works fine at the moment. I can get the character to animate properly each frame and cycle through animations. The problems arise when the width and height of the character change. Often times its position will be corrected by the collision detection system and the character will be rubber-banded to random parts of the map or even go outside the map bounds. For some reason with the linked collision detection algorithm, when the width or height of the sprite is changed on the fly, the entire algorithm breaks down. The solution I found so far is to have a single width and height of the sprite that remains constant, and only adjust the source rectangle for drawing. However, I'm not sure exactly what to set as the sprite's constant bounding box because it varies so much with the different animations. So now I'm not sure what to do. I'm toying with the idea of pixel-perfect collision detection but I'm not sure if it would really be worth it. Does anyone know how Braid does their collision detection? My game is also a 2D sidescroller and I was quite impressed with how it was handled in that game. Thanks for reading.

    Read the article

  • Box2d too much for Circle/Circle collision detection?

    - by Joey Green
    I'm using cocos2d to program a game and am using box2d for collision detection. Everything in my game is a circle and for some reason I'm having a problem with some times things are not being detected as a collision when they should be. I'm thinking of rolling up my own collision detection since I don't think it would be too hard. Questions are: Would this approach work for collision detection between circles? a. get radius of circle A and circle B. b. get distance of the center of circle A and circle B c. if the distance is greater than or equal to the sum of circle A radius and circle B radius then we have a hit Should box2d be used for such simple collision detection? There are no physics in this game.

    Read the article

  • Fraud Detection with the SQL Server Suite Part 1

    - by Dejan Sarka
    While working on different fraud detection projects, I developed my own approach to the solution for this problem. In my PASS Summit 2013 session I am introducing this approach. I also wrote a whitepaper on the same topic, which was generously reviewed by my friend Matija Lah. In order to spread this knowledge faster, I am starting a series of blog posts which will at the end make the whole whitepaper. Abstract With the massive usage of credit cards and web applications for banking and payment processing, the number of fraudulent transactions is growing rapidly and on a global scale. Several fraud detection algorithms are available within a variety of different products. In this paper, we focus on using the Microsoft SQL Server suite for this purpose. In addition, we will explain our original approach to solving the problem by introducing a continuous learning procedure. Our preferred type of service is mentoring; it allows us to perform the work and consulting together with transferring the knowledge onto the customer, thus making it possible for a customer to continue to learn independently. This paper is based on practical experience with different projects covering online banking and credit card usage. Introduction A fraud is a criminal or deceptive activity with the intention of achieving financial or some other gain. Fraud can appear in multiple business areas. You can find a detailed overview of the business domains where fraud can take place in Sahin Y., & Duman E. (2011), Detecting Credit Card Fraud by Decision Trees and Support Vector Machines, Proceedings of the International MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists 2011 Vol 1. Hong Kong: IMECS. Dealing with frauds includes fraud prevention and fraud detection. Fraud prevention is a proactive mechanism, which tries to disable frauds by using previous knowledge. Fraud detection is a reactive mechanism with the goal of detecting suspicious behavior when a fraudster surpasses the fraud prevention mechanism. A fraud detection mechanism checks every transaction and assigns a weight in terms of probability between 0 and 1 that represents a score for evaluating whether a transaction is fraudulent or not. A fraud detection mechanism cannot detect frauds with a probability of 100%; therefore, manual transaction checking must also be available. With fraud detection, this manual part can focus on the most suspicious transactions. This way, an unchanged number of supervisors can detect significantly more frauds than could be achieved with traditional methods of selecting which transactions to check, for example with random sampling. There are two principal data mining techniques available both in general data mining as well as in specific fraud detection techniques: supervised or directed and unsupervised or undirected. Supervised techniques or data mining models use previous knowledge. Typically, existing transactions are marked with a flag denoting whether a particular transaction is fraudulent or not. Customers at some point in time do report frauds, and the transactional system should be capable of accepting such a flag. Supervised data mining algorithms try to explain the value of this flag by using different input variables. When the patterns and rules that lead to frauds are learned through the model training process, they can be used for prediction of the fraud flag on new incoming transactions. Unsupervised techniques analyze data without prior knowledge, without the fraud flag; they try to find transactions which do not resemble other transactions, i.e. outliers. In both cases, there should be more frauds in the data set selected for checking by using the data mining knowledge compared to selecting the data set with simpler methods; this is known as the lift of a model. Typically, we compare the lift with random sampling. The supervised methods typically give a much better lift than the unsupervised ones. However, we must use the unsupervised ones when we do not have any previous knowledge. Furthermore, unsupervised methods are useful for controlling whether the supervised models are still efficient. Accuracy of the predictions drops over time. Patterns of credit card usage, for example, change over time. In addition, fraudsters continuously learn as well. Therefore, it is important to check the efficiency of the predictive models with the undirected ones. When the difference between the lift of the supervised models and the lift of the unsupervised models drops, it is time to refine the supervised models. However, the unsupervised models can become obsolete as well. It is also important to measure the overall efficiency of both, supervised and unsupervised models, over time. We can compare the number of predicted frauds with the total number of frauds that include predicted and reported occurrences. For measuring behavior across time, specific analytical databases called data warehouses (DW) and on-line analytical processing (OLAP) systems can be employed. By controlling the supervised models with unsupervised ones and by using an OLAP system or DW reports to control both, a continuous learning infrastructure can be established. There are many difficulties in developing a fraud detection system. As has already been mentioned, fraudsters continuously learn, and the patterns change. The exchange of experiences and ideas can be very limited due to privacy concerns. In addition, both data sets and results might be censored, as the companies generally do not want to publically expose actual fraudulent behaviors. Therefore it can be quite difficult if not impossible to cross-evaluate the models using data from different companies and different business areas. This fact stresses the importance of continuous learning even more. Finally, the number of frauds in the total number of transactions is small, typically much less than 1% of transactions is fraudulent. Some predictive data mining algorithms do not give good results when the target state is represented with a very low frequency. Data preparation techniques like oversampling and undersampling can help overcome the shortcomings of many algorithms. SQL Server suite includes all of the software required to create, deploy any maintain a fraud detection infrastructure. The Database Engine is the relational database management system (RDBMS), which supports all activity needed for data preparation and for data warehouses. SQL Server Analysis Services (SSAS) supports OLAP and data mining (in version 2012, you need to install SSAS in multidimensional and data mining mode; this was the only mode in previous versions of SSAS, while SSAS 2012 also supports the tabular mode, which does not include data mining). Additional products from the suite can be useful as well. SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS) is a tool for developing extract transform–load (ETL) applications. SSIS is typically used for loading a DW, and in addition, it can use SSAS data mining models for building intelligent data flows. SQL Server Reporting Services (SSRS) is useful for presenting the results in a variety of reports. Data Quality Services (DQS) mitigate the occasional data cleansing process by maintaining a knowledge base. Master Data Services is an application that helps companies maintaining a central, authoritative source of their master data, i.e. the most important data to any organization. For an overview of the SQL Server business intelligence (BI) part of the suite that includes Database Engine, SSAS and SSRS, please refer to Veerman E., Lachev T., & Sarka D. (2009). MCTS Self-Paced Training Kit (Exam 70-448): Microsoft® SQL Server® 2008 Business Intelligence Development and Maintenance. MS Press. For an overview of the enterprise information management (EIM) part that includes SSIS, DQS and MDS, please refer to Sarka D., Lah M., & Jerkic G. (2012). Training Kit (Exam 70-463): Implementing a Data Warehouse with Microsoft® SQL Server® 2012. O'Reilly. For details about SSAS data mining, please refer to MacLennan J., Tang Z., & Crivat B. (2009). Data Mining with Microsoft SQL Server 2008. Wiley. SQL Server Data Mining Add-ins for Office, a free download for Office versions 2007, 2010 and 2013, bring the power of data mining to Excel, enabling advanced analytics in Excel. Together with PowerPivot for Excel, which is also freely downloadable and can be used in Excel 2010, is already included in Excel 2013. It brings OLAP functionalities directly into Excel, making it possible for an advanced analyst to build a complete learning infrastructure using a familiar tool. This way, many more people, including employees in subsidiaries, can contribute to the learning process by examining local transactions and quickly identifying new patterns.

    Read the article

  • Faster 2D Collision detection

    - by eShredder
    Recently I've been working on a fast-paced 2d shooter and I came across a mighty problem. Collision detection. Sure, it is working, but it is very slow. My goal is: Have lots of enemies on screen and have them to not touch each other. All of the enemies are chasing the player entity. Most of them have the same speed so sooner or later they all end up taking the same space while chasing the player. This really drops the fun factor since, for the player, it looks like you are being chased by one enemy only. To prevent them to take the same space I added a collision detection (a very basic 2D detection, the only method I know of) which is. Enemy class update method Loop through all enemies (continue; if the loop points at this object) If enemy object intersects with this object Push enemy object away from this enemy object This works fine. As long as I only have <200 enemy entities that is. When I get closer to 300-350 enemy entities my frame rate begins to drop heavily. First I thought it was bad rendering so I removed their draw call. This did not help at all so of course I realised it was the update method. The only heavy part in their update method is this each-enemy-loops-through-every-enemy part. When I get closer to 300 enemies the game does a 90000 (300x300) step itteration. My my~ I'm sure there must be another way to aproach this collision detection. Though I have no idea how. The pages I find is about how to actually do the collision between two objects or how to check collision between an object and a tile. I already know those two things. tl;dr? How do I aproach collision detection between LOTS of entities? Quick edit: If it is to any help, I'm using C# XNA.

    Read the article

  • Collision Detection in Java for a game

    - by gordsmash
    Im making a game in Java with a few other people but we are stuck on one part of it, making the collision detection. The game is an RPG and I know how to do the collision detection with the characters using Rectangles, but what I dont know how to do is the collision detection for the maps. What I mean by that is like so the character cant walk over trees or water and that stuff but using rectangles doesnt seem like the best option here. Well to explain what the game maps are gonna look like, here is an example http://i980.photobucket.com/albums/ae287/gordsmash/7-8.jpg Now I could use rectangles to get bounds and stop the player from walking over the trees and water but that would take a lot of them. But is there another easier way to prevent the player from walking over the trees and obstacles besides using Rectangles?

    Read the article

  • Collision Detection algorithms with early Collision exit

    - by Grieverheart
    I'm using collision detection in Monte Carlo simulations and at the moment I'm using GJK which is quite fast. I can't help to think it could be done even faster though. In the simulations, about 70% of the time GJK is run, it detects a collision. Thus collisions are more than non-collisions in my case. Most collision detection algorithms I know have an early non-collision exit test. Are there any collision detection algorithms that have an early collision detect instead of non-collision and could be potentially faster than GJK in case of collision?

    Read the article

  • Collision Detection, player correction

    - by DoomStone
    I am having some problems with collision detection, I have 2 types of objects excluding the player. Tiles and what I call MapObjects. The tiles are all 16x16, where the MapObjects can be any size, but in my case they are all 16x16. When my player runs along the mapobjects or tiles, it get verry jaggy. The player is unable to move right, and will get warped forward when moving left. I have found the problem, and that is my collision detection will move the player left/right if colliding the object from the side, and up/down if collision from up/down. Now imagine that my player is sitting on 2 tiles, at (10,12) and (11,12), and the player is mostly standing on the (11,12) tile. The collision detection will first run on then (10,12) tile, it calculates the collision depth, and finds that is is a collision from the side, and therefore move the object to the right. After, it will do the collision detection with (11,12) and it will move the character up. So the player will not fall down, but are unable to move right. And when moving left, the same problem will make the player warp forward. This problem have been bugging me for a few days now, and I just can't find a solution! Here is my code that does the collision detection. public void ApplyObjectCollision(IPhysicsObject obj, List<IComponent> mapObjects, TileMap map) { PhysicsVariables physicsVars = GetPhysicsVariables(); Rectangle bounds = ((IComponent)obj).GetBound(); int leftTile = (int)Math.Floor((float)bounds.Left / map.GetTileSize()); int rightTile = (int)Math.Ceiling(((float)bounds.Right / map.GetTileSize())) - 1; int topTile = (int)Math.Floor((float)bounds.Top / map.GetTileSize()); int bottomTile = (int)Math.Ceiling(((float)bounds.Bottom / map.GetTileSize())) - 1; // Reset flag to search for ground collision. obj.IsOnGround = false; // For each potentially colliding tile, for (int y = topTile; y <= bottomTile; ++y) { for (int x = leftTile; x <= rightTile; ++x) { IComponent tile = map.Get(x, y); if (tile != null) { bounds = HandelCollision(obj, tile, bounds, physicsVars); } } } // Handel collision for all Moving objects foreach (IComponent mo in mapObjects) { if (mo == obj) continue; if (mo.GetBound().Intersects(((IComponent)obj).GetBound())) { bounds = HandelCollision(obj, mo, bounds, physicsVars); } } } private Rectangle HandelCollision(IPhysicsObject obj, IComponent objb, Rectangle bounds, PhysicsVaraibales physicsVars) { // If this tile is collidable, SpriteCollision collision = ((IComponent)objb).GetCollisionType(); if (collision != SpriteCollision.Passable) { // Determine collision depth (with direction) and magnitude. Rectangle tileBounds = ((IComponent)objb).GetBound(); Vector2 depth = bounds.GetIntersectionDepth(tileBounds); if (depth != Vector2.Zero) { float absDepthX = Math.Abs(depth.X); float absDepthY = Math.Abs(depth.Y); // Resolve the collision along the shallow axis. if (absDepthY <= absDepthX || collision == SpriteCollision.Platform) { // If we crossed the top of a tile, we are on the ground. if (obj.PreviousBound.Bottom <= tileBounds.Top) obj.IsOnGround = true; // Ignore platforms, unless we are on the ground. if (collision == SpriteCollision.Impassable || obj.IsOnGround) { // Resolve the collision along the Y axis. ((IComponent)obj).Position = new Vector2(((IComponent)obj).Position.X, ((IComponent)obj).Position.Y + depth.Y); // If we hit something about us, remove all velosity upwards if (depth.Y > 0 && obj.IsJumping) { obj.Velocity = new Vector2(obj.Velocity.X, 0); obj.JumpTime = physicsVars.MaxJumpTime; } // Perform further collisions with the new bounds. return ((IComponent)obj).GetBound(); } } else if (collision == SpriteCollision.Impassable) // Ignore platforms. { // Resolve the collision along the X axis. ((IComponent)obj).Position = new Vector2(((IComponent)obj).Position.X + depth.X, ((IComponent)obj).Position.Y); // Perform further collisions with the new bounds. return ((IComponent)obj).GetBound(); } } } return bounds; } Update: I have uploaded the source code, if you want to look that through. I think that my general approach might be wrong when i am working with small tiles, I have also be unable to find any good information on physics and collision detection in Platform games. http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3181816/Sogaard.Games.SuperMario.rar

    Read the article

  • Circle-Line Collision Detection Problem

    - by jazzdawg
    I am currently developing a breakout clone and I have hit a roadblock in getting collision detection between a ball (circle) and a brick (convex polygon) working correctly. I am using a Circle-Line collision detection test where each line represents and edge on the convex polygon brick. For the majority of the time the Circle-Line test works properly and the points of collision are resolved correctly. Collision detection working correctly. However, occasionally my collision detection code returns false due to a negative discriminant when the ball is actually intersecting the brick. Collision detection failing. I am aware of the inefficiency with this method and I am using axis aligned bounding boxes to cut down on the number of bricks tested. My main concern is if there are any mathematical bugs in my code below. /* * from and to are points at the start and end of the convex polygons edge. * This function is called for every edge in the convex polygon until a * collision is detected. */ bool circleLineCollision(Vec2f from, Vec2f to) { Vec2f lFrom, lTo, lLine; Vec2f line, normal; Vec2f intersectPt1, intersectPt2; float a, b, c, disc, sqrt_disc, u, v, nn, vn; bool one = false, two = false; // set line vectors lFrom = from - ball.circle.centre; // localised lTo = to - ball.circle.centre; // localised lLine = lFrom - lTo; // localised line = from - to; // calculate a, b & c values a = lLine.dot(lLine); b = 2 * (lLine.dot(lFrom)); c = (lFrom.dot(lFrom)) - (ball.circle.radius * ball.circle.radius); // discriminant disc = (b * b) - (4 * a * c); if (disc < 0.0f) { // no intersections return false; } else if (disc == 0.0f) { // one intersection u = -b / (2 * a); intersectPt1 = from + (lLine.scale(u)); one = pointOnLine(intersectPt1, from, to); if (!one) return false; return true; } else { // two intersections sqrt_disc = sqrt(disc); u = (-b + sqrt_disc) / (2 * a); v = (-b - sqrt_disc) / (2 * a); intersectPt1 = from + (lLine.scale(u)); intersectPt2 = from + (lLine.scale(v)); one = pointOnLine(intersectPt1, from, to); two = pointOnLine(intersectPt2, from, to); if (!one && !two) return false; return true; } } bool pointOnLine(Vec2f p, Vec2f from, Vec2f to) { if (p.x >= min(from.x, to.x) && p.x <= max(from.x, to.x) && p.y >= min(from.y, to.y) && p.y <= max(from.y, to.y)) return true; return false; }

    Read the article

  • Eye Detection Problem In Opencv

    - by iva123
    Hi, I'm trying to convert this c code(http://nashruddin.com/OpenCV_Eye_Detection) to the python code, but in c style, he used cvROI thing, since ROI functions are not supported by python-opencv, I tried cvGetSubRect so Here is the eye detection part of the code : eye_region = cvGetSubRect(image,cvRect(face.x,int(face.y + (face.height/4)),face.width,int(face.height/2))) eyes = cvHaarDetectObjects(eye_region,eyeCascade,memo,1.15,3,0,cvSize(25,15)) for e in eyes: cvRectangle(image, cvPoint( int(e.x), int(e.y)), cvPoint(int(e.x + e.width), int(e.y + e.height)), CV_RGB(0, 255, 0), 1, 8, 0) return image; When I run this code, It draws rectangles irrelevant places. I thought, eye_region coordinates are wrong, and tried some coordinates, but it didn't work. Any idea ? Note :Face detection method works very well, and it's code is same with the eye detection method.

    Read the article

  • Collision detection on a 2D hexagonal grid

    - by SundayMonday
    I'm making a casual grid-based 2D iPhone game using Cocos2D. The grid is a "staggered" hex-like grid consisting of uniformly sized and spaced discs. It looks something like this. I've stored the grid in a 2D array. Also I have a concept of "surrounding" grid cells. Namely the six grid cells surrounding a particular cell (except those on the boundries which can have less than six). Anyways I'm testing some collision detection and it's not working out as well as I had planned. Here's how I currently do collision detection for a moving disc that's approaching the stationary group of discs: Calculate ij-coordinates of grid cell closest to moving cell using moving cell's xy-position Get list of surrounding grid cells using ij-coordinates Examine the surrounding cells. If they're all empty then no collision If we have some non-empty surrounding cells then compare the distance between the disc centers to some minimum distance required for a collision If there's a collision then place the moving disc in grid cell ij So this works but not too well. I've considered a potentially simpler brute force approach where I just compare the moving disc to all stationary discs at each step of the game loop. This is probably feasible in terms of performance since the stationary disc count is 300 max. If not then some space-partitioning data structure could be used however that feels too complex. What are some common approaches and best practices to collision detection in a game like this?

    Read the article

  • Collision detection in 3D space

    - by dreta
    I've got to write, what can be summed up as, a compelte 3D game from scratch this semester. Up untill now i have only programmed 2D games in my spare time, the transition doesn't seem tough, the game's simple. The only issue i have is collision detection. The only thing i could find was AABB, bounding spheres or recommendations of various physics engines. I have to program a submarine that's going to be moving freely inside of a cave system, AFAIK i can't use physics libraries, so none of the above solves my problem. Up untill now i was using SAT for my collision detection. Are there any similar, great algorithms, but crafted for 3D collision? I'm not talking about octrees, or other optimalizations, i'm talking about direct collision detection of one set of 3D polygons with annother set of 3D polygons. I thought about using SAT twice, project the mesh from the top and the side, but then it seems so hard to even divide 3D space into convex shapes. Also that seems like far too much computation even with octrees. How do proffessionals do it? Could somebody shed some light.

    Read the article

  • Colored Collision Detection

    - by tugrul büyükisik
    Several years ago, i made a fast collision detection for 2D, it was just checking a bullets front-pixel's color to check if it were to hit something. Lets say the target rgb color is (124,200,255) then it just checks for that color. After the collision detection, it paints the target with appropriate picture. So, collision detection is made in background without drawing but then painted and drawed. How can i do this in 3D? Because, a vertex is not just exist like a 2D picture's pixel. I looked at some java3D and other programs and understood that 3D world is made of objects. Not just pictures. Is there a program that truly fills the world with vertices ? But it could be needing terabytes of ram even more. Do you know an easy way to interpolate the color of a vertex in java3D or similar program? Note: for a rgb color-identifier, i can make 255*255*255 different 2D objects in background.

    Read the article

  • Java collision detection and player movement: tips

    - by Loris
    I have read a short guide for game develompent (java, without external libraries). I'm facing with collision detection and player (and bullets) movements. Now i put the code. Most of it is taken from the guide (should i link this guide?). I'm just trying to expand and complete it. This is the class that take care of updates movements and firing mechanism (and collision detection): public class ArenaController { private Arena arena; /** selected cell for movement */ private float targetX, targetY; /** true if droid is moving */ private boolean moving = false; /** true if droid is shooting to enemy */ private boolean shooting = false; private DroidController droidController; public ArenaController(Arena arena) { this.arena = arena; this.droidController = new DroidController(arena); } public void update(float delta) { Droid droid = arena.getDroid(); //droid movements if (moving) { droidController.moveDroid(delta, targetX, targetY); //check if arrived if (droid.getX() == targetX && droid.getY() == targetY) moving = false; } //firing mechanism if(shooting) { //stop shot if there aren't bullets if(arena.getBullets().isEmpty()) { shooting = false; } for(int i = 0; i < arena.getBullets().size(); i++) { //current bullet Bullet bullet = arena.getBullets().get(i); System.out.println(bullet.getBounds()); //angle calculation double angle = Math.atan2(bullet.getEnemyY() - bullet.getY(), bullet.getEnemyX() - bullet.getX()); //increments x and y bullet.setX((float) (bullet.getX() + (Math.cos(angle) * bullet.getSpeed() * delta))); bullet.setY((float) (bullet.getY() + (Math.sin(angle) * bullet.getSpeed() * delta))); //collision with obstacles for(int j = 0; j < arena.getObstacles().size(); j++) { Obstacle obs = arena.getObstacles().get(j); if(bullet.getBounds().intersects(obs.getBounds())) { System.out.println("Collision detect!"); arena.removeBullet(bullet); } } //collisions with enemies for(int j = 0; j < arena.getEnemies().size(); j++) { Enemy ene = arena.getEnemies().get(j); if(bullet.getBounds().intersects(ene.getBounds())) { System.out.println("Collision detect!"); arena.removeBullet(bullet); } } } } } public boolean onClick(int x, int y) { //click on empty cell if(arena.getGrid()[(int)(y / Arena.TILE)][(int)(x / Arena.TILE)] == null) { //coordinates targetX = x / Arena.TILE; targetY = y / Arena.TILE; //enables movement moving = true; return true; } //click on enemy: fire if(arena.getGrid()[(int)(y / Arena.TILE)][(int)(x / Arena.TILE)] instanceof Enemy) { //coordinates float enemyX = x / Arena.TILE; float enemyY = y / Arena.TILE; //new bullet Bullet bullet = new Bullet(); //start coordinates bullet.setX(arena.getDroid().getX()); bullet.setY(arena.getDroid().getY()); //end coordinates (enemie) bullet.setEnemyX(enemyX); bullet.setEnemyY(enemyY); //adds bullet to arena arena.addBullet(bullet); //enables shooting shooting = true; return true; } return false; } As you can see for collision detection i'm trying to use Rectangle object. Droid example: import java.awt.geom.Rectangle2D; public class Droid { private float x; private float y; private float speed = 20f; private float rotation = 0f; private float damage = 2f; public static final int DIAMETER = 32; private Rectangle2D rectangle; public Droid() { rectangle = new Rectangle2D.Float(x, y, DIAMETER, DIAMETER); } public float getX() { return x; } public void setX(float x) { this.x = x; //rectangle update rectangle.setRect(x, y, DIAMETER, DIAMETER); } public float getY() { return y; } public void setY(float y) { this.y = y; //rectangle update rectangle.setRect(x, y, DIAMETER, DIAMETER); } public float getSpeed() { return speed; } public void setSpeed(float speed) { this.speed = speed; } public float getRotation() { return rotation; } public void setRotation(float rotation) { this.rotation = rotation; } public float getDamage() { return damage; } public void setDamage(float damage) { this.damage = damage; } public Rectangle2D getRectangle() { return rectangle; } } For now, if i start the application and i try to shot to an enemy, is immediately detected a collision and the bullet is removed! Can you help me with this? If the bullet hit an enemy or an obstacle in his way, it must disappear. Ps: i know that the movements of the bullets should be managed in another class. This code is temporary. update I realized what happens, but not why. With those for loops (which checks collisions) the movements of the bullets are instantaneous instead of gradual. In addition to this, if i add the collision detection to the Droid, the method intersects returns true ALWAYS while the droid is moving! public void moveDroid(float delta, float x, float y) { Droid droid = arena.getDroid(); int bearing = 1; if (droid.getX() > x) { bearing = -1; } if (droid.getX() != x) { droid.setX(droid.getX() + bearing * droid.getSpeed() * delta); //obstacles collision detection for(Obstacle obs : arena.getObstacles()) { if(obs.getRectangle().intersects(droid.getRectangle())) { System.out.println("Collision detected"); //ALWAYS HERE } } //controlla se è arrivato if ((droid.getX() < x && bearing == -1) || (droid.getX() > x && bearing == 1)) droid.setX(x); } bearing = 1; if (droid.getY() > y) { bearing = -1; } if (droid.getY() != y) { droid.setY(droid.getY() + bearing * droid.getSpeed() * delta); if ((droid.getY() < y && bearing == -1) || (droid.getY() > y && bearing == 1)) droid.setY(y); } }

    Read the article

  • Collision detection - Smooth wall sliding, no bounce effect

    - by Joey
    I'm working on a basic collision detection system that provides point - OBB collision detection. I have around 200 cubes in my environment and I check (for now) each of them in turn and see if it collides. If it does I return the colliding face's normal, save the old player position and do some trigonometry to return a new player position for my wall sliding. edit I'll define my meaning of wall sliding: If a player walks in a vertical slope and has a slight horizontal rotation to the left or the right and keeps walking forward in the wall the player should slide a little to the right/left while continually walking towards the wall till he left the wall. Thus, sliding along the wall. Everything works fine and with multiple objects as well but I still have one problem I can't seem to figure out: smooth wall sliding. In my current implementation sliding along the walls make my player bounce like a mad man (especially noticable with gravity on and moving forward). I have a velocity/direction vector, a normal vector from the collided plane and an old and new player position. First I negate the normal vector and get my new velocity vector by substracting the inverted normal from my direction vector (which is the vector to slide along the wall) and I add this vector to my new Player position and recalculate the direction vector (in case I have multiple collisions). I know I am missing some step but I can't seem to figure it out. Here is my code for the collision detection (run every frame): Vector direction; Vector newPos(camera.GetOriginX(), camera.GetOriginY(), camera.GetOriginZ()); direction = newPos - oldPos; // Direction vector // Check for collision with new position for(int i = 0; i < NUM_OBJECTS; i++) { Vector normal = objects[i].CheckCollision(newPos.x, newPos.y, newPos.z, direction.x, direction.y, direction.z); if(normal != Vector::NullVector()) { // Get inverse normal (direction STRAIGHT INTO wall) Vector invNormal = normal.Negative(); Vector wallDir = direction - invNormal; // We know INTO wall, and DIRECTION to wall. Substract these and you got slide WALL direction newPos = oldPos + wallDir; direction = newPos - oldPos; } } Any help would be greatly appreciated! FIX I eventually got things up and running how they should thanks to Krazy, I'll post the updated code listing in case someone else comes upon this problem! for(int i = 0; i < NUM_OBJECTS; i++) { Vector normal = objects[i].CheckCollision(newPos.x, newPos.y, newPos.z, direction.x, direction.y, direction.z); if(normal != Vector::NullVector()) { Vector invNormal = normal.Negative(); invNormal = invNormal * (direction * normal).Length(); // Change normal to direction's length and normal's axis Vector wallDir = direction - invNormal; newPos = oldPos + wallDir; direction = newPos - oldPos; } }

    Read the article

  • Multiple Sprites using foreach Collison Detection in XNA (C#)

    - by Bradley Kreuger
    Back again from my last question. Now I was curious I use a foreach statement to use the same shot class. How would I go about doing collison detection. I used the tutorial here on how to shoot a fireball http://www.xnadevelopment.com/tutorials.shtml. I tried to put in several places a foreach to look at all of them to see if they have reached the borders of my sprite hero but doesn't seem to do anything. If again some one might know of a good site that has tutorials to explain collision detection a little bit better that would be appriecated.

    Read the article

  • Solving 2D Collision Detection Issues with Relative Velocities

    - by Jengerer
    Imagine you have a situation where two objects are moving parallel to one-another and are both within range to collide with a static wall, like this: A common method used in dynamic collision detection is to loop through all objects in arbitrary order, solve for pair-wise collision detection using relative velocities, and then move the object to the nearest collision, if any. However, in this case, if the red object is checked first against the blue one, it would see that the relative velocity to the blue object is -20 m/s (and would thereby not collide this time frame). Then it would see that the red object would collide with the static wall, and the solution would be: And the red object passes through the blue one. So it appears to be a matter of choosing the right order in which you check collisions; but how can you determine which order is correct? How can this passing through of objects be avoided? Is ignoring relative velocity and considering every object as static during pair-wise checks a better idea for this reason?

    Read the article

  • Android Java rectangle collision detection not working

    - by Charlton Santana
    I had been hard coding a collision detection system which was buggy. Then I came across using rectangles for collsion detection. So I put it all in and it does not work, I put a log in and it never logged. Note to Java programmers who are not Android programers: Android uses the word Rect instead of Rectangle. Code for Block.java: public Rect getBounds(){ return new Rect (this.x, this.y, 10, 20); } Code for Sprite.java: public Rect getBounds(){ return new Rect (this.x, this.y, 20, 20); } Code for MainGame.java: for(Block block : BLOCKS) { block.draw(canvas); block.rigidbody(); Rect spriter = sprite.getBounds(); Rect blockr = block.getBounds(); if(spriter.intersect(blockr)){ showgameover = 1; Log.d(TAG, "Game Over"); } } Is anyone able to help?

    Read the article

  • Collision Detection fails with AI cars

    - by amit.r007
    I am making a car parking game in flash and AS3 wherein I drive my car along with other AI traffic cars moving along a specified path using Guidelines. I am using CDK for collision detection. The collision detection works fine with few AI cars, but doesn't seems to be working as required for few AI cars. When an AI car is moving on a path in a straight line it works fine.... but when the AI Car turns at 90 degress..... my car goes into the AI car (Overlapping) and it hits at the center of that AI car and then collision is Detected.... ..... I made a New path and used a new Sprite for AI car... but still the problem pursues....

    Read the article

  • Fraud Detection with the SQL Server Suite Part 2

    - by Dejan Sarka
    This is the second part of the fraud detection whitepaper. You can find the first part in my previous blog post about this topic. My Approach to Data Mining Projects It is impossible to evaluate the time and money needed for a complete fraud detection infrastructure in advance. Personally, I do not know the customer’s data in advance. I don’t know whether there is already an existing infrastructure, like a data warehouse, in place, or whether we would need to build one from scratch. Therefore, I always suggest to start with a proof-of-concept (POC) project. A POC takes something between 5 and 10 working days, and involves personnel from the customer’s site – either employees or outsourced consultants. The team should include a subject matter expert (SME) and at least one information technology (IT) expert. The SME must be familiar with both the domain in question as well as the meaning of data at hand, while the IT expert should be familiar with the structure of data, how to access it, and have some programming (preferably Transact-SQL) knowledge. With more than one IT expert the most time consuming work, namely data preparation and overview, can be completed sooner. I assume that the relevant data is already extracted and available at the very beginning of the POC project. If a customer wants to have their people involved in the project directly and requests the transfer of knowledge, the project begins with training. I strongly advise this approach as it offers the establishment of a common background for all people involved, the understanding of how the algorithms work and the understanding of how the results should be interpreted, a way of becoming familiar with the SQL Server suite, and more. Once the data has been extracted, the customer’s SME (i.e. the analyst), and the IT expert assigned to the project will learn how to prepare the data in an efficient manner. Together with me, knowledge and expertise allow us to focus immediately on the most interesting attributes and identify any additional, calculated, ones soon after. By employing our programming knowledge, we can, for example, prepare tens of derived variables, detect outliers, identify the relationships between pairs of input variables, and more, in only two or three days, depending on the quantity and the quality of input data. I favor the customer’s decision of assigning additional personnel to the project. For example, I actually prefer to work with two teams simultaneously. I demonstrate and explain the subject matter by applying techniques directly on the data managed by each team, and then both teams continue to work on the data overview and data preparation under our supervision. I explain to the teams what kind of results we expect, the reasons why they are needed, and how to achieve them. Afterwards we review and explain the results, and continue with new instructions, until we resolve all known problems. Simultaneously with the data preparation the data overview is performed. The logic behind this task is the same – again I show to the teams involved the expected results, how to achieve them and what they mean. This is also done in multiple cycles as is the case with data preparation, because, quite frankly, both tasks are completely interleaved. A specific objective of the data overview is of principal importance – it is represented by a simple star schema and a simple OLAP cube that will first of all simplify data discovery and interpretation of the results, and will also prove useful in the following tasks. The presence of the customer’s SME is the key to resolving possible issues with the actual meaning of the data. We can always replace the IT part of the team with another database developer; however, we cannot conduct this kind of a project without the customer’s SME. After the data preparation and when the data overview is available, we begin the scientific part of the project. I assist the team in developing a variety of models, and in interpreting the results. The results are presented graphically, in an intuitive way. While it is possible to interpret the results on the fly, a much more appropriate alternative is possible if the initial training was also performed, because it allows the customer’s personnel to interpret the results by themselves, with only some guidance from me. The models are evaluated immediately by using several different techniques. One of the techniques includes evaluation over time, where we use an OLAP cube. After evaluating the models, we select the most appropriate model to be deployed for a production test; this allows the team to understand the deployment process. There are many possibilities of deploying data mining models into production; at the POC stage, we select the one that can be completed quickly. Typically, this means that we add the mining model as an additional dimension to an existing DW or OLAP cube, or to the OLAP cube developed during the data overview phase. Finally, we spend some time presenting the results of the POC project to the stakeholders and managers. Even from a POC, the customer will receive lots of benefits, all at the sole risk of spending money and time for a single 5 to 10 day project: The customer learns the basic patterns of frauds and fraud detection The customer learns how to do the entire cycle with their own people, only relying on me for the most complex problems The customer’s analysts learn how to perform much more in-depth analyses than they ever thought possible The customer’s IT experts learn how to perform data extraction and preparation much more efficiently than they did before All of the attendees of this training learn how to use their own creativity to implement further improvements of the process and procedures, even after the solution has been deployed to production The POC output for a smaller company or for a subsidiary of a larger company can actually be considered a finished, production-ready solution It is possible to utilize the results of the POC project at subsidiary level, as a finished POC project for the entire enterprise Typically, the project results in several important “side effects” Improved data quality Improved employee job satisfaction, as they are able to proactively contribute to the central knowledge about fraud patterns in the organization Because eventually more minds get to be involved in the enterprise, the company should expect more and better fraud detection patterns After the POC project is completed as described above, the actual project would not need months of engagement from my side. This is possible due to our preference to transfer the knowledge onto the customer’s employees: typically, the customer will use the results of the POC project for some time, and only engage me again to complete the project, or to ask for additional expertise if the complexity of the problem increases significantly. I usually expect to perform the following tasks: Establish the final infrastructure to measure the efficiency of the deployed models Deploy the models in additional scenarios Through reports By including Data Mining Extensions (DMX) queries in OLTP applications to support real-time early warnings Include data mining models as dimensions in OLAP cubes, if this was not done already during the POC project Create smart ETL applications that divert suspicious data for immediate or later inspection I would also offer to investigate how the outcome could be transferred automatically to the central system; for instance, if the POC project was performed in a subsidiary whereas a central system is available as well Of course, for the actual project, I would repeat the data and model preparation as needed It is virtually impossible to tell in advance how much time the deployment would take, before we decide together with customer what exactly the deployment process should cover. Without considering the deployment part, and with the POC project conducted as suggested above (including the transfer of knowledge), the actual project should still only take additional 5 to 10 days. The approximate timeline for the POC project is, as follows: 1-2 days of training 2-3 days for data preparation and data overview 2 days for creating and evaluating the models 1 day for initial preparation of the continuous learning infrastructure 1 day for presentation of the results and discussion of further actions Quite frequently I receive the following question: are we going to find the best possible model during the POC project, or during the actual project? My answer is always quite simple: I do not know. Maybe, if we would spend just one hour more for data preparation, or create just one more model, we could get better patterns and predictions. However, we simply must stop somewhere, and the best possible way to do this, according to my experience, is to restrict the time spent on the project in advance, after an agreement with the customer. You must also never forget that, because we build the complete learning infrastructure and transfer the knowledge, the customer will be capable of doing further investigations independently and improve the models and predictions over time without the need for a constant engagement with me.

    Read the article

  • Collision Detection Code Structure with Sloped Tiles

    - by ProgrammerGuy123
    Im making a 2D tile based game with slopes, and I need help on the collision detection. This question is not about determining the vertical position of the player given the horizontal position when on a slope, but rather the structure of the code. Here is my pseudocode for the collision detection: void Player::handleTileCollisions() { int left = //find tile that's left of player int right = //find tile that's right of player int top = //find tile that's above player int bottom = //find tile that's below player for(int x = left; x <= right; x++) { for(int y = top; y <= bottom; y++) { switch(getTileType(x, y)) { case 1: //solid tile { //resolve collisions break; } case 2: //sloped tile { //resolve collisions break; } default: //air tile or whatever else break; } } } } When the player is on a sloped tile, he is actually inside the tile itself horizontally, that way the player doesn't look like he is floating. This creates a problem because when there is a sloped tile next to a solid square tile, the player can't move passed it because this algorithm resolves any collisions with the solid tile. Here is a gif showing this problem: So what is a good way to structure my code so that when the player is inside a sloped tile, solid tiles get ignored?

    Read the article

  • Coarse Collision Detection in highly dynamic environment

    - by Millianz
    I'm currently working a 3D space game with A LOT of dynamic objects that are all moving (there is pretty much no static environment). I have the collision detection and resolution working just fine, but I am now trying to optimize the collision detection (which is currently O(N^2) -- linear search). I thought about multiple options, a bounding volume hierarchy, a Binary Spatial Partitioning tree, an Octree or a Grid. I however need some help with deciding what's best for my situation. A grid seems unfeasible simply due to the space requirements and cache coherence problems. Since everything is so dynamic however, it seems to be that trees aren't ideal either, since they would have to be completely rebuilt every frame. I must admit I never implemented a physics engine that required spatial partitioning, do I indeed need to rebuild the tree every frame (assuming that everything is constantly moving) or can I update the trees after integrating? Advice is much appreciated - to give some more background: You're flying a space ship in an asteroid field, and there are lots and lots of asteroids and some enemy ships, all of which shoot bullets. EDIT: I came across the "Sweep an Prune" algorithm, which seems like the right thing for my purposes. It appears like the right mixture of fast building of the data structures involved and detailed enough partitioning. This is the best resource I can find: http://www.codercorner.com/SAP.pdf If anyone has any suggestions whether or not I'm going in the right direction, please let me know.

    Read the article

  • Collision Detection for a 2D RPG

    - by PHMitrious
    First of all, I have done some research on this topic before asking, and I'm asking this question as a mean to get some opinions on this topic, so I don't make a decision only on my own, but taking into account other people's experience as well. I'm starting a 2D online RPG project. I am using SFML for graphics and input and I'm creating a basic game structure and all for the game, creating modules for each part of the game. Well, let me get to the point I just wanted to give you guys some context. I want to decide on how I'm going to work with collision detection. Well I'm kinda going to work on maps with a tile map divided in layers (as usual) and add an extra 2 layers - not exactly in the map - for objects. So I'll have collisions between objects and agents (players - npcs - monsters - spells etc) and agents and tiles. The seconds one can be easily solved the first one need a little bit of work. I considered both creating a basic collision test engine using polygons and a quadtree to diminish tests since I'm going to be working with big maps with lots of objects - creating both a physical and graphical world representation. And I also considered using a physics engine like Box2D for collision tests. I think the first approach would take more work on my part but the second one would have the overhead of using a whole physics engine for just collision detection and no physics. What do you guys think ?

    Read the article

  • improve Collision detection memory usage (blocks with bullets)

    - by Eddy
    i am making a action platform 2D game, something like Megaman. I am using XNA to make it. already made player phisics,collisions, bullets, enemies and AIs, map editor, scorolling X Y camera (about 75% of game is finished ). as i progressed i noticed that my game would be more interesting to play if bullets would be destroyed on collision with regular(stationary ) map blocks, only problem is that if i use my collision detection (each bullet with each block) sometimes it begins to lag(btw if my bullet exits the screen player can see it is removed from bullet list) So how to improve my collision detection so that memory usage would be so high? :) ( on a map 300x300 blocks for example don't think that bigger map should be made); int block = 0; int bulet= 0; bool destroy_bullet = false; while (bulet < bullets.Count) { while (block < blocks.Count) { if (bullets[bulet].P_Bul_rec.Intersects( blocks[block].rect)) {//bullets and block are Lists that holds objects of bullet and block classes //P_Bul_rec just bullet rectangle destroy_bullet = true; } block++; } if (destroy_bullet) { bullets.RemoveAt(bulet); destroy_bullet = false; } else { bulet++; } block = 0; }

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >