In conjunction with a problem with ugly rendering of 2D ellipses in 3D heplots, Duncan Murdock suggested a solution using a new (to me) rgl property: mask_depth
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/64486375/rgl-how-to-avoid-moire-effect-in-transparent-3d-ellipsoids/64490059
In plotEqn3d, we use alpha=1 by default, so this problem doesn't arise, yet the result of showing regression planes is not very insightful. One can only see the non-occluded portions of the planes.
I've implemented Duncan's suggestion in plotEqn3d() on github, and tested it under different values of alpha. My question is: Should I change the default from alpha=1 to something alpha<1 ? Your thoughts?
[This also affects regec3d where the default results are often uglier]
Extending the example:
> # three consistent equations in three unknowns
> A <- matrix(c(13, -4, 2, -4, 11, -2, 2, -2, 8), 3,3)
> b <- c(1,2,4)
> plotEqn3d(A,b)
> plotEqn(A, b, alpha=0.5)
> plotEqn(A, b, alpha=0.8)
The differences among these are best seen in plots you can rotate.
In static views, I get:
alpha=1
alpha=0.5
alpha=0.8
In conjunction with a problem with ugly rendering of 2D ellipses in 3D heplots, Duncan Murdock suggested a solution using a new (to me) rgl property:
mask_depthhttps://stackoverflow.com/questions/64486375/rgl-how-to-avoid-moire-effect-in-transparent-3d-ellipsoids/64490059
In plotEqn3d, we use
alpha=1by default, so this problem doesn't arise, yet the result of showing regression planes is not very insightful. One can only see the non-occluded portions of the planes.I've implemented Duncan's suggestion in
plotEqn3d()on github, and tested it under different values ofalpha. My question is: Should I change the default fromalpha=1to somethingalpha<1? Your thoughts?[This also affects
regec3dwhere the default results are often uglier]Extending the example:
The differences among these are best seen in plots you can rotate.
In static views, I get:
alpha=1
alpha=0.5
alpha=0.8