|
| 1 | +# Crossing-aware port ordering |
| 2 | + |
| 3 | +This document describes the **Crossing aware** port ordering algorithm. For context on ports, their alignment, and the |
| 4 | +available ordering modes, see the [Ports sorting](DATA_MODEL.md#ports-sorting) section in DATA_MODEL.md. |
| 5 | + |
| 6 | +## Overview |
| 7 | + |
| 8 | +The algorithm is a greedy iterative optimizer. It first focuses on minimizing the crossings within each node, and then |
| 9 | +looks for alternative solutions that reduce the global amount of crossings between the nodes. |
| 10 | + |
| 11 | +It is a lightweight heuristic, not a full layout optimizer. It only reorders ports on fixed nodes with fixed positions, |
| 12 | +and runs fast enough to be applied on every layout update. For a more comprehensive approach to transit map layout |
| 13 | +(edge routing, station placement, global crossing minimization), see [LOOM](https://loom.cs.uni-freiburg.de/#stuttgart). |
| 14 | + |
| 15 | +The algorithm works in three phases: |
| 16 | + |
| 17 | +### 1. Connected components |
| 18 | + |
| 19 | +The network is split into independent connected components (via DFS). Each component is optimized separately. |
| 20 | + |
| 21 | +### 2. Port reordering |
| 22 | + |
| 23 | +For each component, a BFS traversal visits every node and reorders its ports. For each pair of ports on the same side, |
| 24 | +the first distinguishing criterion wins: |
| 25 | + |
| 26 | +1. Opposite transition node alignment within the node (geometric preference) |
| 27 | +2. Port position on the opposite side of the transition, if that side has already been ordered (with elbow correction |
| 28 | + for sides that have reversed index ordering) |
| 29 | +3. Opposite node position (left-to-right or top-to-bottom) |
| 30 | +4. Port position in opposite node (if already ordered by BFS) |
| 31 | +5. Trainrun ordering score (tie-breaker, varies between iterations) |
| 32 | + |
| 33 | +Criteria 1 and 2 are designed to eliminate node-internal crossings by sorting ports according to the clockwise rotation |
| 34 | +of their transition nodes. This is what minimizes the number of crossings within each node. |
| 35 | + |
| 36 | +Criteria 3 and 4 propagate constraints along the BFS to minimize crossings between nodes. Criterion 5 is a global |
| 37 | +tie-breaker injected by the iterative optimizer (see below). |
| 38 | + |
| 39 | +### 3. Iterative optimization |
| 40 | + |
| 41 | +The port reordering step (phase 2) is deterministic for a given trainrun ordering. The optimizer explores different |
| 42 | +trainrun orderings to find one that produces fewer crossings between the nodes. It runs multiple iterations (up to |
| 43 | +`maxRuns`, default 50): |
| 44 | + |
| 45 | +1. Start with initial trainrun ordering (from node transitions) |
| 46 | +2. Reorder all ports using the current trainrun ordering as tie-breaker |
| 47 | +3. Count resulting crossings |
| 48 | +4. If crossings improved, identify largest crossing groups (contiguous sets of trainruns that cross each other), and |
| 49 | + generate new candidate orderings by permuting those groups |
| 50 | +5. Pick the next candidate from the stack and repeat |
| 51 | +6. Return the configuration with the fewest crossings |
| 52 | + |
| 53 | +This is a heuristic. It uses DFS (stack-based candidate selection) and caps the number of new candidates per step |
| 54 | +(`maxNewCandidates`, default 10). It does not guarantee a global optimum. |
| 55 | + |
| 56 | +## Crossing detection |
| 57 | + |
| 58 | +Three types of crossings are detected: |
| 59 | + |
| 60 | +- **Direct**: Two parallel sections share the same pair of nodes, but their port order is inverted on one side. |
| 61 | +- **Indirect**: Two sections share one node but go to different destinations, and their port order is inverted. |
| 62 | +- **Node-internal**: Two transitions cross inside a node (detected via clockwise rotation check). |
| 63 | + |
| 64 | +Crossings between trainrun sections that do not share any node are not detected. For instance, a section going from top |
| 65 | +to bottom that visually crosses another one going from left to right will not be counted. Solving these crossings would |
| 66 | +require changing edge paths or node positions, which is outside the scope of port ordering. |
| 67 | + |
| 68 | +## Strengths and limitations |
| 69 | + |
| 70 | +- Works best on **tree-like topologies** (linear networks, branching lines), where BFS propagation is natural. |
| 71 | +- Handles **cycles and dense connectivity** less well: the single global trainrun ordering used as tie-breaker cannot |
| 72 | + express conflicting local preferences. |
| 73 | +- **Prioritizes node-internal crossing elimination** (criteria 1-2 always win over the tie-breaker). This is an |
| 74 | + opinionated choice that works well for typical railway diagrams, but may not be ideal on very dense graphs. |
| 75 | + |
| 76 | +## Source files |
| 77 | + |
| 78 | +- [port-ordering.algo.ts](../../src/app/services/util/port-ordering.algo.ts) - Main algorithm (`optimizePorts`, |
| 79 | + `reorderNodePorts`) |
| 80 | +- [port-ordering.crossings.ts](../../src/app/services/util/port-ordering.crossings.ts) - Crossing detection and |
| 81 | + counting |
| 82 | +- [port-ordering.components.ts](../../src/app/services/util/port-ordering.components.ts) - Connected components |
| 83 | + extraction |
| 84 | +- [port-ordering.helpers.ts](../../src/app/services/util/port-ordering.helpers.ts) - Geometry helpers (elbow detection, |
| 85 | + alignment) |
0 commit comments