I am working on the schematic for a BCD to 7 segment decoder right now. I understand the logic, but it is the design of the schematic that I need help with.
As you can see, I only have three outputs done and I need to add four more. The problem that I am having is everything is so vertical and there is so much white space to the right. I would like to be able to fit in all in one page without having to zoom really far out, because then you can't read the inputs or outputs. I guess I just feel like there is a more simple or effecient way that I can be doing this. In the truth table we are using 1010-1110 as don't cares, and 1111 as 0 for all segments to be off.
I appreciate any help, thanks!
This is more of a programming Q&A site, you might find the electronics site better suited to this question. That being said, Try staggering the gates and outputs, i.e.
-----|\
| o---------------------
-----|/ |-----|\
-------------| | o-------
-------------------|/
-----|\
| o---------------------
-----|/
Related
i put a small request on upwork where i am requesting help for a topic which is right now out of my skill zone.
The problem is a fitting problem of small rectangles in a big rectangle via a ANN.
Problem is the first freelancer baffled me a little bit with a comment.
So my thinking was, because the solution is easy verified and rewardable, that you can simply throw a ANN on this problem and with enough time it will perform better and better.
The freelancer requested labeled data first before he can tackle the problem(thats the comment which confuses me).
I was thinking that unlabeled random Input data is enough for the start.
Do I think wrong?
here the link to the job post.
https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01e040711c31ac0979
edit: directly the original job description
I want python code for training a ANN and using it in a productive enviroment.
The problem it needs to solve is a rectangle fitting problem.
Input are
1000 small Rectangles(groupid,width,heigth,Oriantion(free,restricted,hor or ver), value) --sRect
1 big Rectangles(width, heigth)--bRect
Layout(bool,bool,bool,xpos,ypos,Oriantaion(hor or ver))--Layout
Output
Layout
The bRect will be duplicated to 3 Rectangles where the sRects need to be fitted into.
The Worth of the solution is determined by the sum of the value of sRect inside the bRect.
Further is the value decreased if the sRect is placed in the second bRect or third bRect.
sum(sRect(value))*0.98^nth bRect
Not all sRect needs to be placed.
Layout is structered that the three bool at the start represent at which bRect the sRect is placed. If a sRect is placed at one of the bRect, then the Solution Layout muss stay for this sRect the same.
Restricted Ori means all of the sRect with the same group need to be Oriantated the same way. Hor means the sRect is not turned, ver the sRect is turned by 90degrees.
Other then that normal rules apply, like all sRect needs to be inside the bRect and not Overlapp between sRect.
Looking forward to replys and i am avaible for further explanations.
edit: example picture
important i dont want to optimise for maximum plate usage, because it can happen that a smaller sRect can have a higher value then a bigger sRect.
example fitting problem
Without expected output for each input you cannot use the most standard training methodology - supervised learning. If you only have a way to verify the solution (e.g. in a game of chess you can tell me if I won but you cant tell me how to win) then the most standard approach is reinforcement learning. That being said, it is much more complex problem, not something that say a newcomer to the field of ML will be capable of doing (while supervised learning is something that one can do essentially by following basic tutorials online)
I need a bit of counseling. I´m trying to reproduce one of M.C. Escher´s models in Actionscript, but I´m not entirely sure about where to begin. Ideally, I´d want to make something from his Circle Limit series look somewhat like this: http://vimeo.com/4154382
Could anyone provide any pointers as in what approach should I take? I am not an expert coder, so anything would help.
Thanks in advance,
Garfeel M.D.
The different copies of a hyperbolic transformation are related to one another via Möbius transformations which leave the circle fixed. You can represent them as transformations
(a+bi)z + (c+di)
z |-> ----------------
(c-di)z + (a-bi)
You might want to represent the switch from circle to half plane as a Möbius transformation as well, to avoid numeric issues with simple zooming.
I have tools available to make hyperbolic ornaments from Escher ornaments, and zoom into them in real time. But Escher isn't public domain yet, and in my experience the Escher foundation is less than enthusiastic in granting permission for derived works. So if you get ther OK, or decide on some other artist (possibly starting from a Euclidean ornament), feel free to contact me by e-mail to discuss this further.
I recently was a jury member foir an ornament competition where some submissions were hyperbolized from Euclidean drawings. Gaining permissions for those would likely be easier than from the Escher foundation.
I'm researching the following problem:
Let's say I have a glass of some fluid (water for example). The fluid is completely transparent and I don't have to render it at all.
However a ink drop is dropped in the glass and it's spreading in the water.
The whole thing should be 3D and user should be able to rotate the camera and see the spreading in real time.
I have researched a couple of way to approach this problem, but it turned out that most of them are dead end.
Тhe only approach that has some success was to use enormous amount of particles which form the skeleton of the "inc spread". The physics simulation of the process of spreading is far form perfect, but let's say it's not a problem.
The problem is the rendering part.
As far as I know I'll not be able to speed up the z-sort process greatly by using the flash GPU acceleration, because the upload of those particles to the GPU memory every frame is quite slow?
Can somebody confirm that please?
The other thing that I'm struggling with is the final render. I tried a whole bunch of filters in combination with "post process" techniques to create smooth lines and gradients between the dots, but the result it terrible. If somebody know some article that could help me with that I'll be very grateful.
Overall if there is another viable approach tho the problem please let me know.
Thanks in advance.
Cheers.
You should probably look at Computational Fluid Dynamics in general to get a basic understanding. This should make it easy to play with actionscript implementations like Eugene's Fluid Solver, either in 2D or 3D, tweaking fluid properties to get the look and feel you're after
Sorry for the maybe-trivial post, but I really cannot figure it out...
Let's suppose you have some 3d glasses or something that allows you a 3d stereo vision.
What happens if you invert left and right image??? Thinking at it I cannot really figure out it. Should you see the reverse of the image? Or just some axis-shift?
Unfortunately I cannot try it out in any way, but even if possible, I'd love to try to figure out and understand the thing with my mind before trying it.
So, please, any help, any idea, any hit that can help me to understand or to deeply discuss are welcome.
For the human brain it's next to impossible to give a formal answer, because frankly, neurologists still don't fully understand how it works in detail. But so much we know:
Our brain does no absolute "measurement" on the parallax in stereo images. The whole depth perception works on parallax differences. You could say, the brain takes the derivative of the parallax to build it's mental representation of depth. Derivative of Parallax and depth are taken to be (nearly) proportional. By swapping the pictures the derivative gets negative, so at every point the brain sums up depth in the wrong direction.
However parallax is not the only source for depth perception. Of similar importance is experienced knowledge about typical object in the world. For example faces are "known" to be never inside out, so even with negative parallax the knowledge will overrule and the face being percept in the right form (however it'll clash hilariously with the surroundings).
You would see it as "inside-out" (it's a little more complex than that, but that's the basic truth).
You can experience 3D without any special hardware, thanks to stereoscopic images (side-by-side, then crossing your eyes to see the images as one unique image).
You can then switch right to left, left to right by editing the image.
Here is an example with an image I've found on the web: https://imgur.com/a/ov7U7N5
Do you feel any difference in the depth? Do you see things inside out?
I believe the sense of depth in this case is preserved. But maybe it's just me.
I need an ActionScript 3 library that renders randomized splines with a set amount of loops in the spline, and while I'm Googling, I was hoping someone could recommend some library that I could perhaps download for this purpose.
Thanks in advance!
You can have a look at Degrafa, plenty of splines there. They were implemented by Jim Armstrong, it's worth checking out his site. Loads of explanations for Cardinal Splines, Catmull-Rom Splines, Hermite Curves, etc.
Depends what exactly you're trying to achieve. I'd say have look on Wikipedia at different types of curves, find the one that best suits your needs, then google.
HTH