從圖像中恢復數據點


2

不幸的是,某些數據只能以圖片形式獲得(日本出版物有人嗎?)。由於無法使用此方法,因此必須將其轉換為可以使用的數據集。我想知道這是否可以在Mathematica中完成。考慮以下示例圖像:

enter image description here

任務包括兩個步驟:

  1. 從圖形中提取一個點集
  2. 找到消除失真的函數並將其應用於數據集

在Mathematica中是否有一些簡化的方法?結果應該是盡可能準確的點集,並考慮可以輕鬆準確地繪製Interpolation的點。沒有獲取坐標即可跟踪圖表的獎勵點。

以下是用於生成上面圖像的代碼:

img = ImagePerspectiveTransformation[
    Rasterize[
        Plot[x^((x - 2)^2 E^-x) + E^-x, {x, 0, 10}, PlotStyle -> Thick],
        ImageSize -> 400
    ],
    {{1, 0.1`, 0}, {0.1`, 1, 0}, {0, 0.1`, 1}},
    Padding -> White
]
2

I don't have much experience in that, but as much as I noticed, In both online and live tournaments, the re-assignment process is according to the betting structure in the table that the players should be assigned to.

for example, If a manager want to re-assign player to another table, and in the new table the player will be the big blind, he will choose the player that should be the big blind in the "old" table (or the one after him).

The managers tries to keep on fairness in this case.

of course there are exceptions, but this is (as much as I know), the general idea.


5

In most live tournaments, tables break according to a preset pattern, so that the tables can be reused for other games. For this reason, experienced players often adjust their playing style based on the table they are seated at. If they are at a table that breaks quickly, they know that they do not have time to build strong reads, and must instead take advantage of other factors. Conversely if they are at a table that will not break for a long time, they may work to establish a particular table image, and to build (and exploit) reads on other players. Online tournaments can follow this rule, but definitely do not have to do so.

There is no set rule for how the seat assignments will occur when a player is moved - it varies from one casino to the next. Very seldom are they in any way random though, especially in live events. Instead, they follow whatever rules the casino deems optimal for gameflow and fairness.


1

I doubt that there is such a thing as a "standard practice" when it comes to the reseating process.

I too have played in tourneys in which reseated players always take the cutoff seats. This is certainly fair for the players being reseated, but it does have disadvantages:

  • It's not so fair for the current late-position players. Seating new players at the cutoff position erodes the positional advantage of the former late-position players, especially if more than one player is coming in.
  • Mandating a late-position seat for a reseated player can be a hassle, since it may force several existing players to shift positions. This is particularly bothersome if the tables are packed into a confined space, or if there are players in wheelchairs at the table.

I've not seen a tourney that used an absolute fixed order for collapsing tables. In my tourneys, I usually designate the next table to be broken (at my discretion) so players at that table may act appropriately. I also designate a "feature table" (i.e., where the final table is played) that will not be broken during the tourney.

As for reseating players from a broken table, the most common procedure is to simply assign those players to open seats at random using the seating cards or tags that were used to originally seat the tourney. If a player has the misfortune of getting seated at a blind position, they are still responsible for paying the blind; this is an inviolable rule pretty much everywhere. Tournament directors may or may not adjust the seating to prevent such an inequity; however, this should always be at the director's discretion.


0

It is mostly a random thing, in the sense that the player being moved and where they are being moved to is mostly based on the random events out of a players control. These random events are players going broke, in ways the a player being moved has no control over, and random seating at the beginning of the tournament.

But there are exceptions, some venues do not do random seating, they let players select from available seating (Bad practice in my book). I have worked as a tournament director, some of the things done on a regular basis that decay randomness that we do are avoid moving some players to balance games, and give some players a particular seat. Now this could be done for corrupt reasons someplace I am sure, like keeping a couple of partners in good position to each other and things like that. They reason we did it involved people with some sort of disabilities. We had a lot of old people. Some people with very poor eye site we would try to get them a middle seat so they could see the flop. One particular regular whom was wheel chair bound would always get a seat at the table we would use as the final table and not have his seat changed. It was not particularly fair always, but doing so did not give much of a advantage or disadvantage to anyone.