Re: [boost] [gsoc17]The implement of Programming competency test From Ruoyun Jing

Subject: Re: [boost] [gsoc17]The implement of Programming competency test From Ruoyun Jing
From: Ruoyun Jing (jingry0321_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-03-28 10:49:00

Hi Vissarion,

Here is my [proposal](
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wj9xPSmdehh9MzE-3MGHMu7cwMhDPASUEvU9pJbrW7k/edit?usp=sharing),but
it do not complete yet, now you can comment it and I would like to receive
your advice.:) Also I am adding to the boost mailing list, it is my
pleasure to get comment from you. I will finished the proposal in recent
days, once I finished it I will push the draft on GSoC page.

Thanks all for your help!

Ruoyun.

2017-03-28 18:42 GMT+08:00 Vissarion Fisikopoulos <fisikop_at_[hidden]>:

> Hi Ruoyun,
>
> it seems that you are making a big effort understanding the tools of
> the area. Your ideas are more than
> enough to form a proposal. you should concentrate to make them more
> clear. Try to keep it simple and
> clear. Also regarding you English, I am not a native speaker to give
> professional advice, but also here
> try to make short sentences with simple English, in some parts it is
> not very easy to understand what
> you want to say, but in general I think you are passing the message.
>
> Looking forward to see your draft proposal.
>
> Best,
> Vissarion.
>
> On 27 March 2017 at 14:39, Ruoyun Jing <jingry0321_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > Hi Adam and Vissarion,
> >
> > 2017-03-25 0:46 GMT+08:00 Ruoyun Jing <jingry0321_at_[hidden]>:
> >>
> >> Hi Adam and Vissarion,
> >>
> >> During these days I discussed the ideas of project 1 and begin to write
> my
> >> proposal. Here are what I learn about these project.
> >>
> >> 1.For the approach of compute the 3D cartesian distances first and if
> >> these numbers are not "far enough" then fall back to expensive
> geographic
> >> distance calculation otherwise return the result by comparing those
> numbers
> >> obtained by less expensive cartesian compuation.
> >>
> >> The main problems is declare the "far enough". To figure out this
> problem,
> >> I would implement the method, test the result between function
> >> compare_distance and this method, then adjust parameter to limit
> deviation
> >> in an acceptable range(maybe it would be 1e-6 correapongs, the accurate
> >> value should be discussed by specific condition)
> >>
> >>
> >> 2.For the approach of perform a local spheroid approximation and return
> >> the 2D distance.
> >>
> >> The main problem is to test the acceptable range of using spheroid
> >> approximation. The solution is same as answer above.
> >>
> >>
> >> 3.For the approach of getting 2 intersections of plane (which would be
> >> ellipse) with the help given points and compute the respective distances
> >> using those ellipses.
> >>
> >> In my understand of these approach, it means we need to get
> cross-section
> >> through the center of ellipsoid and the geodesic segments. But I am not
> sure
> >> that the geodesic segments of two points whether can get a cross-section
> >> through the center of ellipsoid, and whether the cross-section is
> ellipse
> >> that we can calculate the sectorial area easy to compare. After check
> out
> >> the geodesic knowledge from differential geometry for a long time. I got
> >> some prove, but I think it isn't very reliable.
> >>
> >>
> >> 4.I have an reliable approach is that we could use the algorithms in
> "map
> >> projection" just like Lambert Conformal Conic, Gauss–Krüger projection,
> >> Mercator projection...etc,
> >>
> >> Those projections make the point on 3D to 2D with reliable functions,
> >> although most of these projections use longitude and latitude, we could
> >> transform our cartisian coordinate into Spherical coordinate then
> transform
> >> them into longitude and latitude then use the projection to
> approximately
> >> calculate.
> >>
> > I read more about projection and we could use Local Cartesian Projection,
> > one of the  equidistant projection, which can provide ellipse and
> spheroid
> > model.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> All of above is what I discussed during these days, Could you please
> >> provide me some advise about them so I can strenthen my proposal?And if
> >> there has any problems about my poor English description please tell
> me, I
> >> will try my best to explain more clearly:)
> >>
> >> Thanks all for your reading!
> >>
> >> Looking forward from you.:)
> >>
> >> Ruoyun
> >> --
> >> Northwest University of China
> >> Software Engineering
> >> jingry0321_at_[hidden]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Northwest University of China
> > Software Engineering
> > jingry0321_at_[hidden]
>

-- 
Northwest University of China
Software Engineering
jingry0321_at_[hidden] <jingry0321_at_[hidden]>