3 ms·
I read the article diagonally, and found no samples of what non-natural leaf shapes does the algorithm produce. Sad. But it is interesting that even complicated
by RBerenguel 17y ago
I read the article diagonally, and found no samples of what non-natural leaf shapes does the algorithm produce. Sad. But it is interesting that even complicated shapes like maple can be produced with such a simple model.
- ableal 17y agoThe editors' "produces one or two shapes not found in nature" may mean Fig.5a and Fig.6c, which are lacking the '[as] seen in' notes given for all others presented. I'd say the author was going for showing that the model covered many (all ? ferns, etc.?) natural shapes. But both the issues of exists-in-nature-but-not-in-model and vice-versa should be interesting. Perhaps the sets of "these parameters do not show up in nature" can give the bio-mechanisms researchers some hints.
- RBerenguel 17y agoI think those missing sets can be very interesting. I didn't realise these figures didn't have tags (I scanned the text twice, but missed them :/) The problem of lack-of-space in journals justifies these kind of cuts, but you can always submit a longer version to ArXiV without any problems or restrictions