2D Voronoi Diagram Adaptor

33.1 | Introduction | ||||

33.2 | Software Design | ||||

33.3 | The Adaptation Traits | ||||

33.4 | The Adaptation Policy | ||||

33.5 | Examples |

This chapter describes an adaptor that adapts two-dimensional triangulated Delaunay graphs to the corresponding Voronoi diagrams. We start with a few definitions and a description of the issues that this adaptor addresses in Section 33.1. The software design of the Voronoi diagram adaptor package is described in Section 33.2. In Section 33.3 we discuss the traits required for performing the adaptation, and finally in Section 33.5 we present a few examples using this adaptor.

A Voronoi diagram is typically defined for a set of objects, also
called sites in the sequel, that lie in some space $$ and a
distance function that measures the distance of a point $$*x* in
$$ from an object in the object set. In this package we are
interested in planar Voronoi diagrams, so in the sequel the space
$$ will be the space $$* ^{2}*.
Let $$

$$* V _{ij} = {x ^{2}: (x,S_{i})<(x,S_{j})}. *

We can then define the set $$*V _{i}* of points on the plane that are closer to
$$

$$* V _{i} = _{i j} V_{ij}. *

The set $$*V _{i}* is said to be the

We typically think of faces as 2-dimensional objects, edges as
1-dimensional objects and vertices as 0-dimensional objects. However,
this may not be the case for several combinations of sites and
distance functions (for example points in $$* ^{2}* under the
$$

Even nice Voronoi diagrams can end up being not so nice. The cell of a
site can in general consist of several disconnected components. Such a
case can happen, for example, when we consider weighted points
$$*Q _{i}=(p_{i},_{i})*, where $$

In many cases we are not really interested in computing the
Voronoi diagram itself, but rather its dual graph, called the
*Delaunay graph*. In general the Delaunay graph is a planar
graph, each face of which consists of at least three edges.
Under the non-degeneracy assumption that no point on the plane is
equidistant, under the distance function, to more than three sites,
the Delaunay graph is a planar graph with triangular faces.
In certain cases this graph can actually be embedded with straight
line segments in which case we talk about a triangulation. This is the
case, for example, for the Euclidean Voronoi diagram of points, or the
power diagram of a set of circles. The dual graphs are, respectively,
the Delaunay triangulation and the regular triangulation of the
corresponding site sets. Graphs of non-constant non-uniform face
complexity can be undesirable in many applications, so typically we
end up triangulating the non-triangular faces of the Delaunay
graph. Intuitively this amounts to imposing an implicit or explicit
perturbation scheme during the construction of the Delaunay graph,
that perturbs the input sites in such a way so as not to have
degenerate configurations.

Choosing between computing the Voronoi diagram or the (triangulated) Delaunay graph is a major decision while implementing an algorithm. It heavily affects the design and choice of the different data structures involved. Although in theory the two approaches are entirely equivalent, it is not so straightforward to go from one representation to the other. The objective of this package is to provide a generic way of going from triangulated Delaunay graphs to planar subdivisions represented through a DCEL data structure. The goal is to provide an adaptor that gives the look and feel of a DCEL data structure, although internally it keeps a graph data structure representing triangular graphs.

The adaptation might seem straightforward at a first glance, and more
or less this is case; after all one graph is the dual of the
other. The situation becomes complicated whenever we want to treat
artifacts of the representation used. Suppose for example that we have
a set of sites that contains subsets of sites in degenerate
positions. The computed triangulated Delaunay graph has triangular
faces that may be the result of an implicit or explicit perturbation
scheme. The dual of such a triangulated Delaunay graph is a Voronoi
diagram that has all its vertices of degree 3, and for that purpose we
are going to call it a *degree-3 Voronoi diagram* in order to
distinguish it from the true Voronoi diagram of the input sites. A
degree-3 Voronoi diagram can have degenerate features, namely Voronoi
edges of zero length, and/or Voronoi faces of zero area. Although we
can potentially treat such artifacts, they are nonetheless artifacts of
the algorithm we used and do not correspond to the true geometry of
the Voronoi diagram.

The manner that we treat such issues in this package in a generic way
is by defining an *adaptation policy*. The adaptation policy is
responsible for determining which features in the degree-3 Voronoi
diagram are to be rejected and which not. The policy to be used can
vary depending on the application or the intended usage of the
resulting Voronoi diagram. What we care about is that firstly the
policy itself is consistent and, secondly, that the adaptation is also
done in a consistent manner. The latter is the responsibility of the
adaptor provided by this package, whereas the former is the
responsibility of the implementor of a policy.

In this package we currently provide two types of adaptation
policies. The first one is the simplest: we reject no feature of the
degree-3 Voronoi diagram; we call such a policy an
*identity policy* since the Voronoi diagram produced is identical
to the degree-3 Voronoi diagram. The second type of policy eliminates
the degenerate features from the degree-3 Voronoi diagram yielding
the true geometry of the Voronoi diagram of the input sites; we call
such policies *degeneracy removal policies*.

Delaunay graphs can be mutable or non-mutable. By mutable we mean that sites can be inserted or removed at any time, in an entirely on-line fashion. By non-mutable we mean that once the Delaunay graph has been created, no changes, with respect to the set of sites defining it, are allowed. If the Delaunay graph is a non-mutable one, then the Voronoi diagram adaptor is a non-mutable adaptor as well.

If the Delaunay graph is mutable then the question of whether the Voronoi diagram adaptor is also mutable is slightly more complex to answer. As long as the adaptation policy used does not maintain a state, the Voronoi diagram adaptor is a mutable one; this is the case, for example, with our identity policy or the degeneracy removal policies. If, however, the adaptor maintains a state, then whether it is mutable or non-mutable really depends on whether its state can be updated after every change in the Delaunay graph. Such policies are our caching degeneracy removal policies: some of them result in mutable adaptors others result in non-mutable ones. In Section 33.4 we discuss the issue in more detail.

The *Voronoi_diagram_2<DG,AT,AP>* class is parameterized by
three template parameters. The first one must be a model of the
*DelaunayGraph_2* concept. It corresponds to the API required by
an object representing a Delaunay graph. All classes of CGAL that
represent Delaunay diagrams are models of this concept, namely,
Delaunay triangulations, regular triangulations, Apollonius
graphs and segment Delaunay graphs.
The second template parameter must be a model of the
*AdaptationTraits_2* concept. We discuss this concept in detail in
Section 33.3.
The third template parameter must be model of the
*AdaptationPolicy_2* concept, which we discuss in detail in
Section 33.4.

The *Voronoi_diagram_2<DG,AT,AP>* class has been
intentionally designed to provide an API similar to the arrangements
class in CGAL: Voronoi diagrams are special cases of arrangements
after all. The API of the two classes, however, could not be
identical. The reason is that arrangements in CGAL do not yet support
more than one unbounded faces, or equivalently, cannot handle
unbounded curves. On the contrary, a Voronoi diagram defined over at
least two generating sites, has at least two unbounded faces.

On a more technical level, the *Voronoi_diagram_2<DG,AT,AP>*
class imitates the representation of the Voronoi diagram (seen as a
planar subdivision) by a DCEL (Doubly Connected Edge List) data
structure. We have vertices (the Voronoi vertices), halfedges
(oriented versions of the Voronoi edges) and faces (the Voronoi
cells). In particular, we can basically perform every operation we can
perform in a standard DCEL data structure:

- go from a halfedge to its next and previous in the face;
- go from one face to an adjacent one through a halfedge and its twin (opposite) halfedge;
- walk around the boundary of a face;
- enumerate/traverse the halfedges incident to a vertex
- from a halfedge, access the adjacent face;
- from a face, access an adjacent halfedges;
- from a halfedges, access its source and target vertices;
- from a vertex, access an incident halfedge.

- the vertices of the Voronoi diagram;
- the edges or halfedges of the Voronoi diagram;
- the faces of the Voronoi diagram;
- the bounded faces of the Voronoi diagram;
- the bounded halfedges of the Voronoi diagram;
- the unbounded faces of the Voronoi diagram;
- the unbounded halfedges of the Voronoi diagram;
- the sites defining the Voronoi diagram.

Finally, depending on the adaptation traits passed to the Voronoi diagram
adaptor, we can perform point location queries, namely given a point
$$*p* we can determine the feature of the Voronoi diagram (vertex, edge,
face) on which $$*p* lies.

The *AdaptationTraits_2* concept defines the types and
functor required by the adaptor in order to access geometric
information in the Delaunay graph that is needed by the
*Voronoi_diagram_2<DG,AT,AP>* class.
In particular, it provides functors for accessing sites in the Delaunay
graph and constructing Voronoi vertices from their dual faces in the
Delaunay graph.
Finally, it defines a tag that indicates whether nearest site queries
are to be supported by the Voronoi diagram adaptor. If such queries
are to be supported, a functor is required.

Given a query point, the nearest site functor should return information
related to how many and which sites of the Voronoi diagram are at
equal and minimal distance from the query point. In particular, if the
query point is closest to a single site, the vertex handle of the
Delaunay graph corresponding to this site is returned. If the
query point is closest to exactly two site, the edge of the
Delaunay graph that is dual to the Voronoi edges on which the query
point lies is returned. If three (or more) sites are closest to
the query point, then the query point coincides with a vertex in the
Voronoi diagram, and the face handle of the face in the Delaunay graph
that is dual to the Voronoi vertex is returned.
This way of abstracting the point location mechanism allows
for multiple different point location strategies, which are passed to
the Voronoi diagram adaptor through different models of the
*AdaptationTraits_2* concept. The point location and nearest sites
queries of the *Voronoi_diagram_2<DG,AT,AP>* class use internally
this nearest site query functor.

In this package we provide four adaptation traits classes, all of which support nearest site queries:

- The
*Apollonius_graph_adaptation_traits_2<AG2>*class: it provides the adaptation traits for Apollonius graphs. - The
*Delaunay_triangulation_adaptation_traits_2<DT2>*class: it provides the adaptation traits for Delaunay triangulations. - The
*Regular_triangulation_adaptation_traits_2<RT2>*class: it provides the adaptation traits for regular triangulations. - The
*Segment_Delaunay_graph_adaptation_traits_2<SDG2>*class: it provides the adaptation traits for segment Delaunay graphs.

As mentioned above, when we perform the adaptation of a triangulated Delaunay graph to a Voronoi diagram, a question that arises is whether we want to eliminate certain features of the Delaunay graph when we construct its Voronoi diagram representation (such features could be the Voronoi edges of zero length or, for the Voronoi diagram of a set of segments forming a polygon, all edges outside the polygon). The manner that we treat such issues in this package in a generic way is by defining an adaptation policy. The adaptation policy is responsible for determining which features in the degree-3 Voronoi diagram are to be rejected and which not. The policy to be used can vary depending on the application or the intended usage of the resulting Voronoi diagram.

The concept *AdaptationPolicy_2* defines the requirements on
the predicate functors that determine whether a feature of the
triangulated Delaunay graph should be rejected or not. More
specifically it defines an *Edge_rejector* and a
*Face_rejector* functor that answer the question: ``should this
edge (face) of the Voronoi diagram be rejected?''. In addition to the
edge and face rejectors the adaptation policy defines a tag, the
*Has_inserter* tag. This tag is either set to *CGAL::Tag_true*
or to *CGAL::Tag_false*. Semantically it determines if the adaptor
is allowed to insert sites in an on-line fashion (on-line removals are
not yet supported). In the former case, i.e., when on-line site
insertions are allowed, an additional functor is required, the
*Site_inserter* functor. This functor takes a reference to a
Delaunay graph and a site, and inserts the site in the Delaunay
graph. Upon successful insertion, a handle to the vertex representing
the site in the Delaunay graph is returned.

We have implemented two types of policies that provide two different
ways for answering the question of which features of the Voronoi
diagram to keep and which to discard. The first one is called the
*identity policy* and corresponds to the
*Identity_policy_2<DG,VT>* class. This policy is in some sense the
simplest possible one, since it does not reject any feature of the
Delaunay graph. The Voronoi diagram provided by the adaptor is the
true dual (from the graph-theoretical point of view) of the
triangulated Delaunay graph adapted. This policy assumes that the
Delaunay graph adapted allows for on-line insertions, and the
*Has_inserter* tag is set to *CGAL::Tag_true*. A default site
inserter functor is also provided.

The second type of policy we provide is called
*degeneracy removal policy*. If the set of sites defining the
triangulated Delaunay graph contains subsets of sites in degenerate
configurations, the graph-theoretical dual of the triangulated
Delaunay graph has edges and potentially faces that are geometrically
degenerate. By that we mean that the dual of the triangulated Delaunay
graph can have Voronoi edges of zero length or Voronoi faces/cells of
zero area. Such features may not be desirable and ideally we would
like to eliminate them. The degeneracy removal policies eliminate
exactly these features and provide a Voronoi diagram where all edges
have non-zero length and all cells have non-zero area. More
specifically, in these policies the *Edge_rejector* and
*Face_rejector* functors reject the edges and vertices of the
Delaunay graph that correspond to dual edges and faces that have zero
length and area, respectively. In this package we provide four
degeneracy removal policies, namely:

- The
*Apollonius_graph_degeneracy_removal_policy_2<AG2>*class: it provides an adaptation policy for removing degeneracies when adapting an Apollonius graph to an Apollonius diagram. - The
*Delaunay_triangulation_degeneracy_removal_policy_2<DT2>*class: it provides an adaptation policy for removing degeneracies when adapting a Delaunay triangulation to a point Voronoi diagram. - The
*Regular_triangulation_degeneracy_removal_policy_2<RT2>*class: it provides an adaptation policy for removing degeneracies when adapting a regular triangulation to a power diagram - The
*Segment_Delaunay_graph_degeneracy_removal_policy_2<SDG2>*class: it provides an adaptation policy for removing degeneracies when adapting a segment Delaunay graph to a segment Voronoi diagram.

A variation of the degeneracy removal policies are the
*caching degeneracy removal policies*. In these policies we cache
the results of the edge and face rejectors. In particular, every time
we want to determine, for example, if an edge of the Delaunay graph
has, as dual edge in the Voronoi diagram, an edge of zero length, we
check if the result has already been computed. If yes, we simply
return the outcome. If not, we perform the necessary geometric tests,
compute the answer, cache it and return it. Such a policy really pays
off when we have a lot of degenerate data in our input set of
sites. Verifying whether a Voronoi edge is degenerate or not implies
computing the outcome of a predicate in a possibly degenerate or near
degenerate configuration, which is typically very costly (compared to
computing the same predicate in a generic configuration). To avoid this cost
every single time we want to check if a Voronoi edge is degenerate or
not, we compute the result of the geometric predicate the first time
the adaptor asks for it, and simply lookup the answer in the future.
In this package we provide four caching degeneracy removal policies,
one per degeneracy removal policy mentioned above.
Intentionally, we have not indicated the value of the
*Has_inserter* tag for the degeneracy removal and caching
degeneracy removal policies. The issue is discussed in detail in the
sequel.

We raised the question above, as to whether the adaptor is a mutable or non-mutable one, in the sense of whether we can add/remove sites in an on-line fashion. The answer to this question depends on: (1) whether the Delaunay graph adapted allows for on-line insertions/removals and (2) whether the adaptation policies maintains a state and whether this state is easily maintainable when we want to allow for on-line modifications.

The way we indicate if we allow on-line insertions of sites is via the
*Has_inserter* tag (as mentioned, on-line removals are currently not
supported). The *Has_inserter* tag has two possible values,
namely, *CGAL::Tag_true* and *CGAL::Tag_false*. The value
*CGAL::Tag_true* indicates that the Delaunay graph allows for
on-line insertions, whereas the value *CGAL::Tag_false* indicates
the opposite. Note that these values *do not* indicate if the
Delaunay graph supports on-line insertions, but rather whether the
Voronoi diagram adaptor should be able to perform on-line insertions
or not. This delicate point will be become clearer below.

Let us consider the various scenarios. If the Delaunay graph is
non-mutable, the Voronoi diagram adaptor cannot perform on-line
insertions of sites. In this case not only degeneracy removal
policies, but rather every single adaptation policy for
adapting the Delaunay graph in question should have the
*Has_inserter* tag set to *CGAL::Tag_false*.

If the Delaunay graph is mutable, i.e., on-line site insertions as are
allowed, we can choose between two types of adaptation policies, those
that allow these on-line insertions and those that do not. In the
former case the *Has_inserter* tag should be set to
*CGAL::Tag_true*, whereas in the latter to
*CGAL::Tag_false*. In other words, even if the Delaunay graph is
mutable, we can choose (by properly determining the value of the
*Has_inserter* tag) if the adaptor should be mutable as well. At a
first glance it may seem excessive to restrict existing
functionality. There are situations, however, where such a choice is
necessary.

Consider a caching degeneracy removal policy. If we do not allow for
on-line insertions then the cached quantities are always valid since
the Voronoi diagram never changes. If we allow for on-line insertions
the Voronoi diagram can change, which implies that the results of the edge
and faces degeneracy testers that we have cached are no longer valid
or relevant. In these cases, we need to somehow update these cached
results, and ideally we would like to do this in an efficient manner.
The inherent dilemma in the above discussion is whether the Voronoi
diagram adaptor should be able to perform on-line insertions of
sites. The answer to this question in this framework is given by the
*Has_inserter* tag. If the tag is set to *CGAL::Tag_false* the
adaptor cannot insert sites on-line, whereas if the tag is set to
*CGAL::Tag_true* the adaptor can add sites on-line. In other
words, the *Has_inserter* tag determines how the Voronoi diagram
adaptor should behave, and this is enough from the adaptor's point of
view.

From the point of a view of a policy writer the dilemma is still
there: should the policy allow for on-line insertions or not? The
answer really depends on what are the consequences of such a
choice. For a policy that has no state, such as our degeneracy removal
policies, it is natural to set the *Has_inserter* tag to
*CGAL::Tag_true*. For our caching degeneracy removal policies, our
choice was made on the grounds of whether we can update the cached
results efficiently when insertions are performed. For CGAL's
Apollonius graphs, Delaunay triangulation and regular triangulations
it is possible to ask what are the edges and faces of the Delaunay
graph that are to be destroyed when a query site is inserted. This is
done via the *get_conflicts* method provided by these
classes. Using the outcome of the *get_conflicts* method the site
inserter can first update the cached results (i.e., indicate which are
invalidated) and then perform the actual insertion. Such a method does
not yet exist for segment Delaunay graphs. We have thus chosen to
support on-line insertions for all non-caching degeneracy removal
policies. The caching degeneracy removal policy for segment Delaunay
graphs does not support on-line insertions, whereas the remaining
three caching degeneracy removal policies support on-line insertions.

One last item that merits some discussion are the different choices from the point of view of time- and space-efficiency.

As far as the Voronoi diagram adaptor is concerned, only a copy of the adaptation traits and a copy of the adaptation policy are stored in it. The various adaptation traits classes we provide are empty classes (i.e., they do not store anything). The major time and space efficiency issues arise from the various implementations of the adaptation policies. Clearly, the identity policy has no dominant effect on neither the time or space efficiency. The costs when choosing this policy are due to the underlying Delaunay graph.

The non-caching degeneracy removal policies create a significant time overhead since every time we want to access a feature of the Voronoi diagram, we need to perform geometric tests in order to see if this feature or one of its neighboring ones has been rejected. Such a policy is acceptable if we know we are away from degeneracies or for small input sizes. In the case of the segment Delaunay graph, it is also the only policy we provide that at the same time removes degeneracies and allows for on-line insertion of sites. Caching policies seem to be the best choice for moderate to large input sizes (1000 sites and more). They do not suffer from the problem of dealing with degenerate configurations, but since they cache the results, they increase the space requirements by linear additive factor. To conclude, if the user is interested in getting a Voronoi diagram without degenerate features and knows all sites in advance, the best course of action is to insert all sites at construction time and use a caching degeneracy removal policy. This strategy avoids the updates of the cached results after each individual insertion, due to the features of the Voronoi diagram destroyed because of the site inserted.

In this section we present an example that shows how to perform point location queries.

File:examples/Voronoi_diagram_2/point_location.cpp

#include <CGAL/basic.h> // standard includes #include <iostream> #include <fstream> #include <cassert> // includes for defining the Voronoi diagram adaptor #include <CGAL/Exact_predicates_inexact_constructions_kernel.h> #include <CGAL/Delaunay_triangulation_2.h> #include <CGAL/Voronoi_diagram_2.h> #include <CGAL/Delaunay_triangulation_adaptation_traits_2.h> #include <CGAL/Delaunay_triangulation_adaptation_policies_2.h> // typedefs for defining the adaptor typedef CGAL::Exact_predicates_inexact_constructions_kernel K; typedef CGAL::Delaunay_triangulation_2<K> DT; typedef CGAL::Delaunay_triangulation_adaptation_traits_2<DT> AT; typedef CGAL::Delaunay_triangulation_caching_degeneracy_removal_policy_2<DT> AP; typedef CGAL::Voronoi_diagram_2<DT,AT,AP> VD; // typedef for the result type of the point location typedef AT::Site_2 Site_2; typedef AT::Point_2 Point_2; typedef VD::Locate_result Locate_result; typedef VD::Vertex_handle Vertex_handle; typedef VD::Face_handle Face_handle; typedef VD::Halfedge_handle Halfedge_handle; typedef VD::Ccb_halfedge_circulator Ccb_halfedge_circulator; void print_endpoint(Halfedge_handle e, bool is_src) { std::cout << "\t"; if ( is_src ) { if ( e->has_source() ) std::cout << e->source()->point() << std::endl; else std::cout << "point at infinity" << std::endl; } else { if ( e->has_target() ) std::cout << e->target()->point() << std::endl; else std::cout << "point at infinity" << std::endl; } } int main() { std::ifstream ifs("data/data1.dt.cin"); assert( ifs ); VD vd; Site_2 t; while ( ifs >> t ) { vd.insert(t); } ifs.close(); assert( vd.is_valid() ); std::ifstream ifq("data/queries1.dt.cin"); assert( ifq ); Point_2 p; while ( ifq >> p ) { std::cout << "Query point (" << p.x() << "," << p.y() << ") lies on a Voronoi " << std::flush; Locate_result lr = vd.locate(p); if ( Vertex_handle* v = boost::get<Vertex_handle>(&lr) ) { std::cout << "vertex." << std::endl; std::cout << "The Voronoi vertex is:" << std::endl; std::cout << "\t" << (*v)->point() << std::endl; } else if ( Halfedge_handle* e = boost::get<Halfedge_handle>(&lr) ) { std::cout << "edge." << std::endl; std::cout << "The source and target vertices " << "of the Voronoi edge are:" << std::endl; print_endpoint(*e, true); print_endpoint(*e, false); } else if ( Face_handle* f = boost::get<Face_handle>(&lr) ) { std::cout << "face." << std::endl; std::cout << "The vertices of the Voronoi face are" << " (in counterclockwise order):" << std::endl; Ccb_halfedge_circulator ec_start = (*f)->outer_ccb(); Ccb_halfedge_circulator ec = ec_start; do { print_endpoint(ec, false); } while ( ++ec != ec_start ); } std::cout << std::endl; } ifq.close(); return 0; }