[Feature] Boundary visualization for limited-size environments

[Giovannibriglia]

This tries to fix #134

[Giovannibriglia]

Let me know what do you think about it. I am not so sure regarding ''infinite_value = np.infty"

[matteobettini]

This we can put in the Scneario class like the other rendering options

[Giovannibriglia]

Ok :)

[matteobettini]

We can remove the origin as this will always be the physical origin in 0,0

[Giovannibriglia]

Ok :)

[matteobettini]

Did you test what np.infty plots? does it work? Maybe there is a way to plot an infinite long line in pyglet, we should check, otherwise we can choose a very high value

[Giovannibriglia]

Unfortunately, I haven't been able to test it yet, which is why I was hoping to get your feedback. :) In other instances, it seems to work fine.

Using np.infty doesn't seem like the best approach. I couldn't find any guidance on how to implement an infinite line or one that progressively extends. For now, the simplest option seems to be setting infinite_value to a very large number (perhaps 10^9?). What do you think?

[matteobettini]

Yeah that might be best

To test it just run a scenario of your choice and play with the args:

• one boundary only, both, none
• also play with the rendering settings in the Scenario base class to check that they do not affect the rendering of the boundaries

[Giovannibriglia]

Ok, I have just tried this in navigation, it should works fine.

Let me resume what I have done in order to assess if it is ok:

• in use_vmas_env.py, I have just setted scenario_name="navigation" and enforce_bounds=True;
• in navigation.py, I have modified this if statement (just for this assessment)

  VectorizedMultiAgentSimulator/vmas/scenarios/navigation.py

  Line 56 in 26ceb42

  if self.enforce_bounds:

  in this

        if self.enforce_bounds:
            self.x_semidim = None # self.world_spawning_x
            self.y_semidim = self.world_spawning_y
        else:
            self.x_semidim = None
            self.y_semidim = None

• I have run the simulation and this is the rendering result:
  

If I try with y_semidim, the result is analogous.
It should be okay, what do you think?

[matteobettini]

looks very good

also try changing these settings from the make_world in navigation to check they interact well with the feature

VectorizedMultiAgentSimulator/vmas/simulator/scenario.py

Lines 49 to 53 in 26ceb42

	self.viewer_size = INITIAL_VIEWER_SIZE
	"""The size of the rendering viewer window. This can be changed in the :class:`~make_world` function. """
	self.viewer_zoom = VIEWER_DEFAULT_ZOOM
	"""The zoom of the rendering camera (a lower value means more zoom). This can be changed in the :class:`~make_world` function. """
	self.render_origin = (0.0, 0.0)

[Giovannibriglia]

Ops, yeah it should works well, I didn't say you previously :)

I have set:

• self.viewer_size = (640, 540)
• self.viewer_zoom = 0.6
• self.render_origin = (-2, 1)

Here the result:

[matteobettini]

Very cool! ok push and i ll review

[matteobettini]

Ok, now, there are some scenarios that already plot their boundaries

We need to set self.visualize_semidims=False in these scenarios in order to keep their old buondar plottiing, they are:

• passage
• joint_passage_size
• joint_passage
• ball_passage
• sampling
• football
• read_traffic
• simple_tag
• balance

[matteobettini]

In the case of only one boundary set we need just 2 lines not 4

[Giovannibriglia]

In the case of only one boundary set we need just 2 lines not 4

Sorry, are you sure?

Eventhough are just two lines, in my opinion, we should specify 4 points. Anyway, I agree that the previous implementation drew a square/rectangle.

I think the point regards the for-loop for drawing lines, for this reason I suggest this new implementation. But I'm not understanding why it draws nothing in the case of just "two parallel lines".

if x_semi is not None and y_semi is not None: # drawing square/rectangle

    boundary_edges = [
        (-x_semi, y_semi),  # top_left
        (x_semi, y_semi),  # top_right
        (x_semi, -y_semi),  # bottom_right
        (-x_semi, -y_semi)  # bottom_left
    ]

    # Create lines to form the boundary by connecting each corner to the next
    for i in range(len(boundary_edges)):
        start = boundary_edges[i]  # Current corner point
        end = boundary_edges[
            (i + 1) % len(boundary_edges)]  # Next corner point, wrap around to the first point
        print(start, end)
        line = Line(start, end, width=0.7)  # Create a line between two corners
        line.set_color(*color)  # Set the line color
        self.viewer.add_onetime(line)  # Add the line to the viewer for rendering

else: # drawing two parallel lines

    # if only x_semi is provided, draw horizontal lines
    if x_semi is not None:
        boundary_edges = [
            (-x_semi, infinite_value),  # upper_left
            (x_semi, infinite_value),  # upper_right
            (-x_semi, -infinite_value),  # lower_left
            (x_semi, -infinite_value)  # lower_right
        ]

    # if only y_semi is provided, draw vertical lines
    elif y_semi is not None:
        boundary_edges = [
            (infinite_value, y_semi),  # right_top
            (infinite_value, -y_semi),  # right_bottom
            (-infinite_value, y_semi),  # left_top
            (-infinite_value, -y_semi)  # left_bottom
        ]

    else:
        boundary_edges = []

    # create the two parallel lines by connecting the points
    for i in range(0, len(boundary_edges), 2):
        start = boundary_edges[i]
        end = boundary_edges[i + 1]
        print(start, end)
        line = Line(start, end, width=0.7)
        line.set_color(*color)
        self.viewer.add_onetime(line)

What do you think?

[Giovannibriglia]

I was wrong in labelling boundary_edges, the correct name should be boundary_points or something like this.

[matteobettini]

yes what you did is what i was thinking, still 4 points, but only draw 2 lines when only one semidim is available.

I do think we can write it a little more compactly tho:

• define the 4 points like before
• write only once the line creation loop making it work for 2 or 4 lines

[matteobettini]

if it is too difficult also as is it works, but more compact would look better

[matteobettini]

what we want to avoid is drawing 4 lines when only one semidim is available

[Giovannibriglia]

Ok, now, there are some scenarios that already plot their boundaries

We need to set self.visualize_semidims=False in these scenarios in order to keep their old buondar plottiing, they are:

• passage
• joint_passage_size
• joint_passage
• ball_passage
• sampling
• football
• read_traffic
• simple_tag
• balance

Yes, you're correct. Is it just a matter of inserting self.visualize_semidims = False into these scripts?

[matteobettini]

Yes, you're correct. Is it just a matter of inserting self.visualize_semidims = False into these scripts?

Exactly

[Giovannibriglia]

Now it should be fine :)

• Is setting infinite_value = 100 sufficient?
• Does the "impossible case" in the if statement need to be handled? And if so, have I implemented it correctly?

[Giovannibriglia]

I attempted to set self.visualize_semidims = False consistently before world creation. Does this seem okay?

Also, I couldn't locate the simple_tag scenario :/

[matteobettini]

Last nits

[matteobettini]

this looks the same as the first part of the if

[Giovannibriglia]

I have just fixed

[matteobettini]

I attempted to set self.visualize_semidims = False consistently before world creation. Does this seem okay?

Also, I couldn't locate the simple_tag scenario :/

it is in scenarios/mpe

[matteobettini]

Now it should be fine :)

• Is setting infinite_value = 100 sufficient?
• Does the "impossible case" in the if statement need to be handled? And if so, have I implemented it correctly?

100 seems decent, higher values do not render for me, we can always change it later

[matteobettini]

Suggested change

	if (self.world.x_semidim and self.world.y_semidim) or self.world.x_semidim:
	if (self.world.x_semidim and self.world.y_semidim) or self.world.y_semidim is not None:

• i think it was y not x
• always use is not None as it might trigger or not when it is 0 or not (imagine the nightmare)

[Giovannibriglia]

Ok, thanks for this; should we add "is not None" also in the other parts?

[matteobettini]

oh i think all of this got a bit messed up, i'll let you test it and then i ll do the last test

[Giovannibriglia]

Apologies for the caos :(

I wanted to ask if I should include 'is not None' in other if-statements like:

• x_semi = self.world.x_semidim if self.world.x_semidim else infinite_value --> x_semi = self.world.x_semidim if self.world.x_semidim is not None else infinite_value (and similarly for y_semi)
• 1 if (self.world.x_semidim and self.world.y_semidim) else 2 --> 1 if (self.world.x_semidim is not None and self.world.y_semidim is not None) else 2

I've tested all the scenarios with and without 'is not None,' and they worked fine.

But just to be on the safe side, as you suggested, I'll add 'is not None' wherever possible. Does that sound good?

[matteobettini]

I believe we are there Gio!

[Giovannibriglia]

Yeeeee, great!!!

Thank you for your patience :)