Advertisement

PSO-Based Newton-Like Method and Iteration Processes in the Generation of Artistic Patterns

  • Ireneusz GościniakEmail author
  • Krzysztof Gdawiec
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11241)

Abstract

In artistic pattern generation one can find many different approaches to the generation process. One of such approaches is the use of root finding methods. In this paper, we present a new method of generating artistic patterns with the use of root finding. We modify the classical Newton’s method using a Particle Swarm Optimization approach. Moreover, we introduce various iteration processes instead of the standard Picard iteration used in the Newton’s method. Presented examples show that using the proposed method we are able to obtain very interesting and diverse patterns that could have an artistic application, e.g., in texture generation, tapestry or textile design etc.

Keywords

Generative art Root finding Dynamics Iterations Visualization 

References

  1. 1.
    Wannarumon, S., Unnanon, K., Bohez, E.: Intelligent computer system for jewelry design support. Comput. Aided Des. Appl. 1(1–4), 551–558 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Soo, S., Yu, K., Chiu, W.: Modeling and fabrication of artistic products based on IFS fractal representation. Comput. Aided Des. 38(7), 755–769 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Setti, R.: Generative dreams from deep belief networks. In: Soddu, C., Colabella, E. (eds.) Generative Art 2015: Proceeding of XVIII Generative Art Conference, pp. 260–273. Domus Argenia Publisher, Milan (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jia, C., Ming-Xi, T.: Integrating shape grammars into a generative system for Zhuang ethnic embroidery design exploration. Comput. Aided Des. 45(3), 591–604 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kalantari, B.: Polynomiography and applications in art, education and science. Comput. Graph. 28(3), 417–430 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kalantari, B.: Polynomial Root-Finding and Polynomiography. World Scientific, Singapore (2009)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gdawiec, K.: Fractal patterns from the dynamics of combined polynomial root finding methods. Nonlinear Dyn. 90(4), 2457–2479 (2017)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gosciniak, I.: Immune algorithm in non-stationary optimization task. In: 2008 International Conference on Computational Intelligence for Modelling Control Automation, pp. 750–755, December 2008Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gosciniak, I.: Discussion on semi-immune algorithm behaviour based on fractal analysis. Soft Comput. 21(14), 3945–3956 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cheney, W., Kincaid, D.: Numerical Mathematics and Computing, 6th edn. Brooks/Cole, Pacific Grove (2007)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mann, W.: Mean value methods in iteration. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 4(3), 506–510 (1953)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ishikawa, S.: Fixed points by a new iteration method. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 44(1), 147–150 (1974)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Agarwal, R., O’Regan, D., Sahu, D.: Iterative construction of fixed points of nearly asymptotically nonexpansive mappings. J. Nonlinear Convex Anal. 8(1), 61–79 (2007)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gdawiec, K., Kotarski, W.: Polynomiography for the polynomial infinity norm via Kalantari’s formula and nonstandard iterations. Appl. Math. Comput. 307, 17–30 (2017)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Das, G., Debata, J.: Fixed points of quasi-nonexpansive mappings. Indian J. Pure Appl. Math. 17(11), 1263–1269 (1986)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Khan, S., Cho, Y., Abbas, M.: Convergence to common fixed points by a modified iteration process. J. Appl. Math. Comput. 35(1), 607–616 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Computer ScienceUniversity of SilesiaSosnowiecPoland

Personalised recommendations