Wedge Visualization (Interactive)
GRG — Wedge Visualization: Interactive Uniform vs Adaptive Discretization
This mini-demo provides concrete, reproducible numbers for wedge-stratified GRG. Adjust the controls to compare a uniform wedge count against an adaptive profile on the outer annulus, and see how certified corridor half-widths contract roughly like 1/\sqrt{W_k} for comparable ring budgets.
How the Demo Works (plain language)
- Dyadic edges. Rings follow turns-first dyadic refinement with
b∈ℕ≥0,N=2^b, and quarter samplingΔu=2^{-b-2}. - Corridor half-width. Each sector’s estimate has a certified interval
[E^- , E^+]. The half-width is(E^+−E^-)/2; decisions stop when this width ≤ toleranceτ. - Field model. We synthesize an anisotropic field with mixed angular orders up to fourth order to stress the wedges; values are computed in-page so the numbers are concrete and repeatable.
Controls
Results — Per-Sector Estimates on the Outer Annulus
Hover or tap a bar to read exact values (estimate and corridor half-width). The polar plots show the directional pattern and corridor bands.
Concrete Numbers (auto-computed)
The table aggregates sector values (outer annulus) for the current settings. Replace later with CSVs from your scripts; the structure is the same.
Notes & Practical Guidance
- When to prefer GRG. As angular richness grows or is localized, adaptive
W_kexposes structure with linearO(K·W)cost and certified decisions viaτ. - When low-order bases suffice. Near-radial scenes with mild 2-fold variation are well captured by a short angular basis; choose GRG when auditability (corridors) matters.
- Next steps. Publish side-by-side benchmarks (Zernike, B-splines, Fourier–Bessel) with the same corridor-aware stopping rule and public scripts/datasets.