DOCSLIB.ORG

Fractals and Julia Sets; Iteration Gone Wild

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fractals and Julia Sets; Iteration Gone Wild Fractals and Julia sets; iteration gone wild Randall Pyke, Dept of Mathematics, SFU gone wild gone wild gone wild gone wild gone wild gone wild gone wild gone wild gone wild What‟s in a formula? “The set “The set of complex numbers “The set of complex numbers such that “The set of complex numbers such that the supremum („maximum‟) over all natural numbers n “The set of complex numbers such that the supremum („maximum‟) over all natural numbers n of the absolute value of the nth iterate of is finite” “The set of complex numbers such that the supremum („maximum‟) over all natural numbers n of the absolute value of the nth iterate of is finite” “The set of complex numbers such that the supremum („maximum‟) over all natural numbers n of the absolute value of the nth iterate of is finite” “The set of complex numbers such that the supremum („maximum‟) over all natural numbers n of the absolute value of the nth iterate of is finite” What is iteration? is the nth iteration (composition) of the function f; So, is the nth iteration of f(z), starting at z=0; For the quadratic function , this becomes; and so, For example, if c=1 then, Thus, the iterates define a sequence of numbers depending on c, one number for each n. Thus, the iterates define a sequence of numbers depending on c, one number for each n. The numbers c are complex numbers; they are two dimensional numbers; The real numbers (this line) We can represent (visualize) the complex numbers by sketching them on the complex plane; The number 0 The complex plane; The complex plane; The Mandelbrot set is also a set of complex numbers in the complex plane; The complex plane; The Mandelbrot set is also a set of complex numbers in the complex plane; How do you decide which complex numbers are in the Mandelbrot set? The complex plane; The Mandelbrot set is also a set of complex numbers in the complex plane; How do you decide which complex numbers are in the Mandelbrot set? Through iteration Procedure to decide if a complex number c is in the Mandelbrot set or not: So, the Mandelbrot set are those complex numbers c such that the iterations of the quadratic function starting at z=0 never become too large; The Mandelbrot set is bizarre; Iterating the MRCM (Multiple Reduction Copy Machine) 3 copies of original at ½ the size 1st iteration: Start with this shape: Iterating the MRCM This is the image when you start with the 1st image 1st iteration: 2nd iteration Start with this shape: Iterating the MRCM 1st iteration: 2nd iteration Start with Note the hole this shape: Iterating the MRCM 1st iteration: 2nd iteration 3rd iteration Start with this shape: Iterating the MRCM 1st iteration: 2nd iteration 3rd iteration Start with this shape: 4th iteration Iterating the MRCM 1st iteration: 2nd iteration 3rd iteration Start with this shape: 4th iteration 5th iteration Iterating the MRCM 1st iteration: 2nd iteration 3rd iteration Start with this shape: 4th iteration 5th iteration Many iterations Can start the iteration with any shape! And still obtain the Sierpinski triangle Another MRCM and its iterations (4 lenses); Start with 1st iteration 2nd 3rd An MRCM with 2 lenses: Initial image 1st iteration 2nd iteration 3rd iteration 4th iteration 5th iteration Produces the Cantor set Two important properties of these MRCMs; 1) Beginning with any initial image, the same final image is produced through iteration, 2) The final image is the only one that doesn’t change through iteration The final image is thus called the fixed point of the MRCM Iterated Function Systems (IFSs) as MRCMs An IFS is a function W that acts on images, producing another image; We can visualize the IFS W through its blueprint; the image of a square by W We can visualize the IFS W through its blueprint; the image of a square by W The Sierpinski IFS blueprint; 3 images of the square We can visualize the IFS W through its blueprint; the image of a square by W The Sierpinski IFS blueprint; 3 images of the square Now iterate….. 1st iteration (blueprint) 1st iteration (blueprint) 2nd iteration 1st iteration (blueprint) 2nd iteration 3rd iteration 1st iteration (blueprint) 2nd iteration 3rd iteration 8th iteration Is the fixed point of W Is the fixed point of W Fractal geometry. Iteration of functions f: R R Graphical iteration y = x f(x)=mx+b p p Fixed point p; f(p)=p. Where the graph of f(x) crosses the diagonal line y=x. Graphical iteration x1 = f(x0) x2 = f(x1) x3 = f(x2) p x0 Starting at any x0, iterates will converge to p Graphical iteration x1 = f(x0) x2 = f(x1) x3 = f(x2) p x0 Starting at any x0, iterates will converge to p Graphical iteration x1 = f(x0) x2 = f(x1) x3 = f(x2) p x0 Starting at any x0, iterates will converge to p Graphical iteration x1 = f(x0) x2 = f(x1) x3 = f(x2) p x1 x0 Starting at any x0, iterates will converge to p Graphical iteration x1 = f(x0) x2 = f(x1) x3 = f(x2) p x1 x0 Starting at any x0, iterates will converge to p Graphical iteration x1 = f(x0) x2 = f(x1) x3 = f(x2) p x2 x1 x0 Starting at any x0, iterates will converge to p Graphical iteration x1 = f(x0) x2 = f(x1) x3 = f(x2) p x2 x1 x0 Starting at any x0, iterates will converge to p Graphical iteration x1 = f(x0) x2 = f(x1) x3 = f(x2) p x3 x2 x1 x0 Starting at any x0, iterates will converge to p Graphical iteration x1 = f(x0) x2 = f(x1) x3 = f(x2) p x3 x2 x1 x0 Starting at any x0, iterates will converge to p Graphical iteration x1 = f(x0) x2 = f(x1) x3 = f(x2) x2 x0 x1 p x3 x2 x1 x0 Starting at any x0, iterates will converge to p Not all iteration finds fixed points…. Graphical iteration f(x) = mx+b x1 = f(x0) x2 = f(x1) y = x x3 = f(x2) p p f(p)=p Graphical iteration f(x) = mx+b x1 = f(x0) y = x x2 = f(x1) x3 = f(x2) p x0 Starting at any x0, iterates will diverge away from p Graphical iteration f(x)=mx+b x1 = f(x0) x2 = f(x1) x3 = f(x2) p x0 Starting at any x0, iterates will diverge away from p Graphical iteration f(x)=mx+b x1 = f(x0) x2 = f(x1) x3 = f(x2) p x0 Starting at any x0, iterates will diverge away from p Graphical iteration f(x)=mx+b x1 = f(x0) x2 = f(x1) x3 = f(x2) p x0 x1 Starting at any x0, iterates will diverge away from p Graphical iteration f(x)=mx+b x1 = f(x0) x2 = f(x1) x3 = f(x2) p x0 x1 Starting at any x0, iterates will diverge away from p Graphical iteration f(x)=mx+b x1 = f(x0) x2 = f(x1) x3 = f(x2) p x0 x1 x2 Starting at any x0, iterates will diverge away from p Graphical iteration f(x)=mx+b x1 = f(x0) x2 = f(x1) x3 = f(x2) x2 x1 x0 p x0 x1 x2 Starting at any x0, iterates will diverge away from p Prisoner and escape sets Define: • The prisoner set P of f(x) is those points that do not go off to infinity under iteration by f • The escape set E of f(x) is those points that do go off to infinity under iteration. (All points are either in P or E) We‟ve seen: • For linear f(x) with |m|<1, P is all points, E is empty • For linear f(x) with |m|>1, P is just the fixed point p, and E are all the other points For nonlinear f(x) the sets P and E can both contain many points, and it can be difficult to determine exactly what P and E are . y = x P = [-1,1] E = (-∞,-1) U (1, ∞) c=1/4 y = x c=1/4 y = x Period 1 orbit; 0 0 0 0 … Period 2 orbit; 0 -1 0 -1 …. Period 4 orbit Period 8 orbit Period 3 orbit Prisoner set = {-p, p, . } ••• ••••••• •• • ••••••• •• ••• ••••••• •• • ••••••• •• Conclusion; Prisoner set P is an interval if -2 < c < ¼. Otherwise P is empty or just points. ••• ••••••• •• • ••••••• •• Conclusion; Prisoner set P is an interval if -2 < c < ¼. Otherwise P is empty or just points. The Mandelbrot sits between -2 and ¼; ••• ••••••• •• • ••••••• •• Conclusion; Prisoner set P is an interval if -2 < c < ¼. Otherwise P is empty or just points. The Mandelbrot sits between -2 and ¼; The Mandelbrot set is related to the shape of the prisoner set….. c = -1/2 + 1/2i Self-similarity of Prisoner sets The Julia Set is the boundary (edge) of the prisoner set. Some Julia sets in 2 dimensions (complex numbers): Some Julia sets in 2 dimensions (complex numbers) Zoom into a Julia set The other (and original) definition of the Mandelbrot set; The Mandelbrot set are those c such that the Julia set is one piece One piece Dust The Mandelbrot set are those c such that the Julia set is one piece One piece Dust Julia sets in colour! Julia sets in colour! How many iterations before the point „escapes‟? 10 20 30 40 50 100 > 200; the prisoner set Theorem of Julia and Fatou (c.a. 1900); “The Prisoner set is one piece if and only if the iterates of are bounded” And so we can define the Mandelbrot set as; “The set of complex numbers such that the supremum („maximum‟) over all natural numbers n of the absolute value of the nth iteration of fc(0) is finite” The Mandelbrot set The Mandelbrot set in colour 10 20 30 40 50 100 200 > 200; the Mandelbrot set The Mandelbrot set in colour The Mandelbrot set in other colours The Mandelbrot set in other colours The Mandelbrot set in other colours The Mandelbrot set in other colours The Mandelbrot set in other colours Zoom into the Mandelbrot set….
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fractal (Mandelbrot and Julia) Zero-Knowledge Proof of Identity
    Journal of Computer Science 4 (5): 408-414, 2008 ISSN 1549-3636 © 2008 Science Publications Fractal (Mandelbrot and Julia) Zero-Knowledge Proof of Identity Mohammad Ahmad Alia and Azman Bin Samsudin School of Computer Sciences, University Sains Malaysia, 11800 Penang, Malaysia Abstract: We proposed a new zero-knowledge proof of identity protocol based on Mandelbrot and Julia Fractal sets. The Fractal based zero-knowledge protocol was possible because of the intrinsic connection between the Mandelbrot and Julia Fractal sets. In the proposed protocol, the private key was used as an input parameter for Mandelbrot Fractal function to generate the corresponding public key. Julia Fractal function was then used to calculate the verified value based on the existing private key and the received public key. The proposed protocol was designed to be resistant against attacks. Fractal based zero-knowledge protocol was an attractive alternative to the traditional number theory zero-knowledge protocol. Key words: Zero-knowledge, cryptography, fractal, mandelbrot fractal set and julia fractal set INTRODUCTION Zero-knowledge proof of identity system is a cryptographic protocol between two parties. Whereby, the first party wants to prove that he/she has the identity (secret word) to the second party, without revealing anything about his/her secret to the second party. Following are the three main properties of zero- knowledge proof of identity[1]: Completeness: The honest prover convinces the honest verifier that the secret statement is true. Soundness: Cheating prover can’t convince the honest verifier that a statement is true (if the statement is really false). Fig. 1: Zero-knowledge cave Zero-knowledge: Cheating verifier can’t get anything Zero-knowledge cave: Zero-Knowledge Cave is a other than prover’s public data sent from the honest well-known scenario used to describe the idea of zero- prover.
    [Show full text]
  • Rendering Hypercomplex Fractals Anthony Atella [email protected]
    Rhode Island College Digital Commons @ RIC Honors Projects Overview Honors Projects 2018 Rendering Hypercomplex Fractals Anthony Atella [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.ric.edu/honors_projects Part of the Computer Sciences Commons, and the Other Mathematics Commons Recommended Citation Atella, Anthony, "Rendering Hypercomplex Fractals" (2018). Honors Projects Overview. 136. https://digitalcommons.ric.edu/honors_projects/136 This Honors is brought to you for free and open access by the Honors Projects at Digital Commons @ RIC. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Projects Overview by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ RIC. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Rendering Hypercomplex Fractals by Anthony Atella An Honors Project Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for Honors in The Department of Mathematics and Computer Science The School of Arts and Sciences Rhode Island College 2018 Abstract Fractal mathematics and geometry are useful for applications in science, engineering, and art, but acquiring the tools to explore and graph fractals can be frustrating. Tools available online have limited fractals, rendering methods, and shaders. They often fail to abstract these concepts in a reusable way. This means that multiple programs and interfaces must be learned and used to fully explore the topic. Chaos is an abstract fractal geometry rendering program created to solve this problem. This application builds off previous work done by myself and others [1] to create an extensible, abstract solution to rendering fractals. This paper covers what fractals are, how they are rendered and colored, implementation, issues that were encountered, and finally planned future improvements.
    [Show full text]
  • Generating Fractals Using Complex Functions
    Generating Fractals Using Complex Functions Avery Wengler and Eric Wasser What is a Fractal? ● Fractals are infinitely complex patterns that are self-similar across different scales. ● Created by repeating simple processes over and over in a feedback loop. ● Often represented on the complex plane as 2-dimensional images Where do we find fractals? Fractals in Nature Lungs Neurons from the Oak Tree human cortex Regardless of scale, these patterns are all formed by repeating a simple branching process. Geometric Fractals “A rough or fragmented geometric shape that can be split into parts, each of which is (at least approximately) a reduced-size copy of the whole.” Mandelbrot (1983) The Sierpinski Triangle Algebraic Fractals ● Fractals created by repeatedly calculating a simple equation over and over. ● Were discovered later because computers were needed to explore them ● Examples: ○ Mandelbrot Set ○ Julia Set ○ Burning Ship Fractal Mandelbrot Set ● Benoit Mandelbrot discovered this set in 1980, shortly after the invention of the personal computer 2 ● zn+1=zn + c ● That is, a complex number c is part of the Mandelbrot set if, when starting with z0 = 0 and applying the iteration repeatedly, the absolute value of zn remains bounded however large n gets. Animation based on a static number of iterations per pixel. The Mandelbrot set is the complex numbers c for which the sequence ( c, c² + c, (c²+c)² + c, ((c²+c)²+c)² + c, (((c²+c)²+c)²+c)² + c, ...) does not approach infinity. Julia Set ● Closely related to the Mandelbrot fractal ● Complementary to the Fatou Set Featherino Fractal Newton’s method for the roots of a real valued function Burning Ship Fractal z2 Mandelbrot Render Generic Mandelbrot set.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Structures of Generating Iterated Function Systems of Cantor Sets
    ON THE STRUCTURES OF GENERATING ITERATED FUNCTION SYSTEMS OF CANTOR SETS DE-JUN FENG AND YANG WANG Abstract. A generating IFS of a Cantor set F is an IFS whose attractor is F . For a given Cantor set such as the middle-3rd Cantor set we consider the set of its generating IFSs. We examine the existence of a minimal generating IFS, i.e. every other generating IFS of F is an iterating of that IFS. We also study the structures of the semi-group of homogeneous generating IFSs of a Cantor set F in R under the open set condition (OSC). If dimH F < 1 we prove that all generating IFSs of the set must have logarithmically commensurable contraction factors. From this Logarithmic Commensurability Theorem we derive a structure theorem for the semi-group of generating IFSs of F under the OSC. We also examine the impact of geometry on the structures of the semi-groups. Several examples will be given to illustrate the difficulty of the problem we study. 1. Introduction N d In this paper, a family of contractive affine maps Φ = fφjgj=1 in R is called an iterated function system (IFS). According to Hutchinson [12], there is a unique non-empty compact d SN F = FΦ ⊂ R , which is called the attractor of Φ, such that F = j=1 φj(F ). Furthermore, FΦ is called a self-similar set if Φ consists of similitudes. It is well known that the standard middle-third Cantor set C is the attractor of the iterated function system (IFS) fφ0; φ1g where 1 1 2 (1.1) φ (x) = x; φ (x) = x + : 0 3 1 3 3 A natural question is: Is it possible to express C as the attractor of another IFS? Surprisingly, the general question whether the attractor of an IFS can be expressed as the attractor of another IFS, which seems a rather fundamental question in fractal geometry, has 1991 Mathematics Subject Classification.
    [Show full text]
  • Iterated Function Systems, Ruelle Operators, and Invariant Projective Measures
    MATHEMATICS OF COMPUTATION Volume 75, Number 256, October 2006, Pages 1931–1970 S 0025-5718(06)01861-8 Article electronically published on May 31, 2006 ITERATED FUNCTION SYSTEMS, RUELLE OPERATORS, AND INVARIANT PROJECTIVE MEASURES DORIN ERVIN DUTKAY AND PALLE E. T. JORGENSEN Abstract. We introduce a Fourier-based harmonic analysis for a class of dis- crete dynamical systems which arise from Iterated Function Systems. Our starting point is the following pair of special features of these systems. (1) We assume that a measurable space X comes with a finite-to-one endomorphism r : X → X which is onto but not one-to-one. (2) In the case of affine Iterated Function Systems (IFSs) in Rd, this harmonic analysis arises naturally as a spectral duality defined from a given pair of finite subsets B,L in Rd of the same cardinality which generate complex Hadamard matrices. Our harmonic analysis for these iterated function systems (IFS) (X, µ)is based on a Markov process on certain paths. The probabilities are determined by a weight function W on X. From W we define a transition operator RW acting on functions on X, and a corresponding class H of continuous RW - harmonic functions. The properties of the functions in H are analyzed, and they determine the spectral theory of L2(µ).ForaffineIFSsweestablish orthogonal bases in L2(µ). These bases are generated by paths with infinite repetition of finite words. We use this in the last section to analyze tiles in Rd. 1. Introduction One of the reasons wavelets have found so many uses and applications is that they are especially attractive from the computational point of view.
    [Show full text]
  • Georg Cantor English Version
    GEORG CANTOR (March 3, 1845 – January 6, 1918) by HEINZ KLAUS STRICK, Germany There is hardly another mathematician whose reputation among his contemporary colleagues reflected such a wide disparity of opinion: for some, GEORG FERDINAND LUDWIG PHILIPP CANTOR was a corruptor of youth (KRONECKER), while for others, he was an exceptionally gifted mathematical researcher (DAVID HILBERT 1925: Let no one be allowed to drive us from the paradise that CANTOR created for us.) GEORG CANTOR’s father was a successful merchant and stockbroker in St. Petersburg, where he lived with his family, which included six children, in the large German colony until he was forced by ill health to move to the milder climate of Germany. In Russia, GEORG was instructed by private tutors. He then attended secondary schools in Wiesbaden and Darmstadt. After he had completed his schooling with excellent grades, particularly in mathematics, his father acceded to his son’s request to pursue mathematical studies in Zurich. GEORG CANTOR could equally well have chosen a career as a violinist, in which case he would have continued the tradition of his two grandmothers, both of whom were active as respected professional musicians in St. Petersburg. When in 1863 his father died, CANTOR transferred to Berlin, where he attended lectures by KARL WEIERSTRASS, ERNST EDUARD KUMMER, and LEOPOLD KRONECKER. On completing his doctorate in 1867 with a dissertation on a topic in number theory, CANTOR did not obtain a permanent academic position. He taught for a while at a girls’ school and at an institution for training teachers, all the while working on his habilitation thesis, which led to a teaching position at the university in Halle.
    [Show full text]
  • Sphere Tracing, Distance Fields, and Fractals Alexander Simes
    Sphere Tracing, Distance Fields, and Fractals Alexander Simes Advisor: Angus Forbes Secondary: Andrew Johnson Fall 2014 - 654108177 Figure 1: Sphere Traced images of Menger Cubes and Mandelboxes shaded by ambient occlusion approximation on the left and Blinn-Phong with shadows on the right Abstract Methods to realistically display complex surfaces which are not practical to visualize using traditional techniques are presented. Additionally an application is presented which is capable of utilizing some of these techniques in real time. Properties of these surfaces and their implications to a real time application are discussed. Table of Contents 1 Introduction 3 2 Minimal CPU Sphere Tracing Model 4 2.1 Camera Model 4 2.2 Marching with Distance Fields Introduction 5 2.3 Ambient Occlusion Approximation 6 3 Distance Fields 9 3.1 Signed Sphere 9 3.2 Unsigned Box 9 3.3 Distance Field Operations 10 4 Blinn-Phong Shadow Sphere Tracing Model 11 4.1 Scene Composition 11 4.2 Maximum Marching Iteration Limitation 12 4.3 Surface Normals 12 4.4 Blinn-Phong Shading 13 4.5 Hard Shadows 14 4.6 Translation to GPU 14 5 Menger Cube 15 5.1 Introduction 15 5.2 Iterative Definition 16 6 Mandelbox 18 6.1 Introduction 18 6.2 boxFold() 19 6.3 sphereFold() 19 6.4 Scale and Translate 20 6.5 Distance Function 20 6.6 Computational Efficiency 20 7 Conclusion 2 1 Introduction Sphere Tracing is a rendering technique for visualizing surfaces using geometric distance. Typically surfaces applicable to Sphere Tracing have no explicit geometry and are implicitly defined by a distance field.
    [Show full text]
  • How Math Makes Movies Like Doctor Strange So Otherworldly | Science News for Students
    3/13/2020 How math makes movies like Doctor Strange so otherworldly | Science News for Students MATH How math makes movies like Doctor Strange so otherworldly Patterns called fractals are inspiring filmmakers with ideas for mind-bending worlds Kaecilius, on the right, is a villain and sorcerer in Doctor Strange. He can twist and manipulate the fabric of reality. The film’s visual-effects artists used mathematical patterns, called fractals, illustrate Kaecilius’s abilities on the big screen. MARVEL STUDIOS By Stephen Ornes January 9, 2020 at 6:45 am For wild chase scenes, it’s hard to beat Doctor Strange. In this 2016 film, the fictional doctor-turned-sorcerer has to stop villains who want to destroy reality. To further complicate matters, the evildoers have unusual powers of their own. “The bad guys in the film have the power to reshape the world around them,” explains Alexis Wajsbrot. He’s a film director who lives in Paris, France. But for Doctor Strange, Wajsbrot instead served as the film’s visual-effects artist. Those bad guys make ordinary objects move and change forms. Bringing this to the big screen makes for chases that are spectacular to watch. City blocks and streets appear and disappear around the fighting foes. Adversaries clash in what’s called the “mirror dimension” — a place where the laws of nature don’t apply. Forget gravity: Skyscrapers twist and then split. Waves ripple across walls, knocking people sideways and up. At times, multiple copies of the entire city seem to appear at once, but at different sizes.
    [Show full text]
  • Fractal Geometry and Applications in Forest Science
    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Egolfs V. Bakuzis, Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota, College of Natural Resources, collected most of the information upon which this review is based. We express our sincere appreciation for his investment of time and energy in collecting these articles and books, in organizing the diverse material collected, and in sacrificing his personal research time to have weekly meetings with one of us (N.L.) to discuss the relevance and importance of each refer- enced paper and many not included here. Besides his interdisciplinary ap- proach to the scientific literature, his extensive knowledge of forest ecosystems and his early interest in nonlinear dynamics have helped us greatly. We express appreciation to Kevin Nimerfro for generating Diagrams 1, 3, 4, 5, and the cover using the programming package Mathematica. Craig Loehle and Boris Zeide provided review comments that significantly improved the paper. Funded by cooperative agreement #23-91-21, USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul, Minnesota. Yg._. t NAVE A THREE--PART QUE_.gTION,, F_-ACHPARToF:WHICH HA# "THREEPAP,T_.<.,EACFi PART" Of:: F_.AC.HPART oF wHIct4 HA.5 __ "1t4REE MORE PARTS... t_! c_4a EL o. EP-.ACTAL G EOPAgTI_YCoh_FERENCE I G;:_.4-A.-Ti_E AT THB Reprinted courtesy of Omni magazine, June 1994. VoL 16, No. 9. CONTENTS i_ Introduction ....................................................................................................... I 2° Description of Fractals ....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Fractals Lindenmayer Systems
    FRACTALS LINDENMAYER SYSTEMS November 22, 2013 Rolf Pfeifer Rudolf M. Füchslin RECAP HIDDEN MARKOV MODELS What Letter Is Written Here? What Letter Is Written Here? What Letter Is Written Here? The Idea Behind Hidden Markov Models First letter: Maybe „a“, maybe „q“ Second letter: Maybe „r“ or „v“ or „u“ Take the most probable combination as a guess! Hidden Markov Models Sometimes, you don‘t see the states, but only a mapping of the states. A main task is then to derive, from the visible mapped sequence of states, the actual underlying sequence of „hidden“ states. HMM: A Fundamental Question What you see are the observables. But what are the actual states behind the observables? What is the most probable sequence of states leading to a given sequence of observations? The Viterbi-Algorithm We are looking for indices M1,M2,...MT, such that P(qM1,...qMT) = Pmax,T is maximal. 1. Initialization ()ib 1 i i k1 1(i ) 0 2. Recursion (1 t T-1) t1(j ) max( t ( i ) a i j ) b j k i t1 t1(j ) i : t ( i ) a i j max. 3. Termination Pimax,TT max( ( )) qmax,T q i: T ( i ) max. 4. Backtracking MMt t11() t Efficiency of the Viterbi Algorithm • The brute force approach takes O(TNT) steps. This is even for N = 2 and T = 100 difficult to do. • The Viterbi – algorithm in contrast takes only O(TN2) which is easy to do with todays computational means. Applications of HMM • Analysis of handwriting. • Speech analysis. • Construction of models for prediction.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding the Mandelbrot and Julia Set
    Understanding the Mandelbrot and Julia Set Jake Zyons Wood August 31, 2015 Introduction Fractals infiltrate the disciplinary spectra of set theory, complex algebra, generative art, computer science, chaos theory, and more. Fractals visually embody recursive structures endowing them with the ability of nigh infinite complexity. The Sierpinski Triangle, Koch Snowflake, and Dragon Curve comprise a few of the more widely recognized iterated function fractals. These recursive structures possess an intuitive geometric simplicity which makes their creation, at least at a shallow recursive depth, easy to do by hand with pencil and paper. The Mandelbrot and Julia set, on the other hand, allow no such convenience. These fractals are part of the class: escape-time fractals, and have only really entered mathematicians’ consciousness in the late 1970’s[1]. The purpose of this paper is to clearly explain the logical procedures of creating escape-time fractals. This will include reviewing the necessary math for this type of fractal, then specifically explaining the algorithms commonly used in the Mandelbrot Set as well as its variations. By the end, the careful reader should, without too much effort, feel totally at ease with the underlying principles of these fractals. What Makes The Mandelbrot Set a set? 1 Figure 1: Black and white Mandelbrot visualization The Mandelbrot Set truly is a set in the mathematica sense of the word. A set is a collection of anything with a specific property, the Mandelbrot Set, for instance, is a collection of complex numbers which all share a common property (explained in Part II). All complex numbers can in fact be labeled as either a member of the Mandelbrot set, or not.
    [Show full text]
  • Extending Mandelbox Fractals with Shape Inversions
    Extending Mandelbox Fractals with Shape Inversions Gregg Helt Genomancer, Healdsburg, CA, USA; [email protected] Abstract The Mandelbox is a recently discovered class of escape-time fractals which use a conditional combination of reflection, spherical inversion, scaling, and translation to transform points under iteration. In this paper we introduce a new extension to Mandelbox fractals which replaces spherical inversion with a more generalized shape inversion. We then explore how this technique can be used to generate new fractals in 2D, 3D, and 4D. Mandelbox Fractals The Mandelbox is a class of escape-time fractals that was first discovered by Tom Lowe in 2010 [5]. It was named the Mandelbox both as an homage to the classic Mandelbrot set fractal and due to its overall boxlike shape when visualized, as shown in Figure 1a. The interior can be rich in self-similar fractal detail as well, as shown in Figure 1b. Many modifications to the original algorithm have been developed, almost exclusively by contributors to the FractalForums online community. Although most explorations of Mandelboxes have focused on 3D versions, the algorithm can be applied to any number of dimensions. (a) (b) (c) Figure 1: Mandelbox 3D fractal examples: (a) Mandelbox exterior , (b) same Mandelbox, but zoomed in view of small section of interior , (c) Juliabox indexed by same Mandelbox. Like the Mandelbrot set and other escape-time fractals, a Mandelbox set contains all the points whose orbits under iterative transformation by a function do not escape. For a basic Mandelbox the function to apply iteratively to each point �" is defined as a composition of transformations: �#$% = ��ℎ�������1,3 �������6 �# ∗ � + �" Boxfold and Spherefold are modified reflection and spherical inversion transforms, respectively, with parameters F, H, and L which are described below.
    [Show full text]