Formed in 2009, the Archive Team (not to be confused with the archive.org Archive-It Team) is a rogue archivist collective dedicated to saving copies of rapidly dying or deleted websites for the sake of history and digital heritage. The group is 100% composed of volunteers and interested parties, and has expanded into a large amount of related projects for saving online and digital history.
Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 50 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Sign upGitHub is where the world builds software
Millions of developers and companies build, ship, and maintain their software on GitHub — the largest and most advanced development platform in the world.
Chapter 3.11 mention the model of WFC #82
Closed
Assignees
Labels
Comments
|
I'll see if I can clarify. I ended up using adjacency because it is more likely to give a working map (similarity is great, but without an understanding of traversability you can get beautiful - but unreachable - maps). Thanks! |
|
Yes, and I like your credible implementation. It produces connected maps, and it works MUCH faster than the OverlappingModel. And the idea of using small chunks is very appealing. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3.11 Wave Function Collapse
The official WFC repo has two models: SimpleTiledModel and OverlappingModel. And it looks like the former is implemented in the book. But today, "WFC" tends to refer to the latter model, so it might be a bit confusing to those who are new to WFC.
Then I suggest stating that there are two models, and that the OverlappingModel is not explained in the book. It may be helpful to readers who also want to read other resources about WFC (like me :)).
Note: the SimpleTiledModel forces that any adjacent chunks are compatible. While the OverlappingModel forces that any overlapping chunks are compatible.
Edit: Sorry, it was misleading. Actually, your WFC is not exactly a SimpleTiledModel. It may be more like a hybrid of the two models. You collect chunks from the source (not from xml), but you place them based on adjacency (not on local similarity). So there are two kind of constraints to fullfill the map, and you explained one of them. I guess that's worth mentioning!