Develop Reference

Measure integral between 2 curves (linear func & arbitrary curve)

In the img. below my goal is to locate the integral in area 1 / 2 / 3.
In that way that I know how much area below the linear line (area 1 / 3),
and how much area that are above the linear line (area 2)
Im not looking for the exact integral, just an approximately value to measure on. an approx that would work in the same fashion for other version of the curves I have represented.
y1: The blue line is a linear function y= -0.148x + 1301.35
y2:The yellow line is a arbitrary curve
Both curves share the same x axis.
image of curves linear & arbitrary curve
I have tried several methods, found here on stackoverflow, mainly theese 2 methods cought my attention:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/57827807
&
https://stackoverflow.com/a/25447819
They give me the exact same output for the whole area, my issue is to seperate it above / below.
Example of my best try:
(Modified version of https://stackoverflow.com/a/25447819/20441461)
y1 / y2 / x - is the data used for the curves in the img. above
y1 = [1298.54771845, 1298.40019417, 1298.2526699, 1298.10514563,
1297.95762136,1297.81009709, 1297.66257282, 1297.51504854]
y2 = [1298.59, 1297.31, 1296.04, 1297.31, 1296.95, 1299.18, 1297.05, 1297.45]
x = np.arange(len(y1))
z = y1-y2
dx = x[1:] - x[:-1]
cross_test = np.sign(z[:-1] * z[1:])
x_intersect = x[:-1] - dx / (z[1:] - z[:-1]) * z[:-1]
dx_intersect = - dx / (z[1:] - z[:-1]) * z[:-1]
areas_pos = abs(z[:-1] + z[1:]) * 0.5 * dx # signs of both z are same
areas_neg = 0.5 * dx_intersect * abs(z[:-1]) + 0.5 * (dx - dx_intersect) * abs(z[1:])
negatives = np.where(cross_test < 0)
negative_sum = np.sum(x_intersect[negatives])
positives = np.where(cross_test >= 0)
positive_sum = np.sum(x_intersect[positives])`
is give me this result:
Negative integral = 10.15
Positive integral = 9.97
Just from looking at the picture, I can tell that can not be the correct value. ( there is alot more area below the linear line than above.)
I have spend loads of time now on this, and are quite stuck - any advise or suggestion are welcome.

Here is a little bit of code that calculates exactly all the areas, and does so in a vectorized way (fast):
def areas(x, y1, y2, details=None):
dy = y1 - y2
b0 = dy[:-1]
b1 = dy[1:]
b = np.c_[b0, b1]
r = np.abs(b0) / (np.abs(b0) + np.abs(b1))
rr = np.c_[r, 1-r]
dx = np.diff(x)
h = rr * dx[:, None]
br = (b * rr[:, ::-1]).sum(1)
a = (b + br[:, None]) * h / 2
result = np.sum(a[a > 0]), np.sum(a[a < 0])
if details is not None:
details.update(locals()) # for debugging
return result
Example:
x = np.array([0,1,2])
y1 = np.array([1,0,3])
y2 = np.array([0,3,4])
>>> areas(x, y1, y2)
(0.125, -3.125)
Your original example:
y1 = np.array([
1298.54771845, 1298.40019417, 1298.2526699, 1298.10514563,
1297.95762136,1297.81009709, 1297.66257282, 1297.51504854])
y2 = np.array([1298.59, 1297.31, 1296.04, 1297.31, 1296.95, 1299.18, 1297.05, 1297.45])
x = np.arange(len(y1))
>>> areas(x, y1, y2)
(5.228440802728334, -0.8687563377282332)
Explanation
To understand how it works, let us consider the quadrilateral of four points: [a, b, c, d], where a and b are at the same x position, and so are c and d. It can be "straight" if none of the edges intersect, or "twisted" otherwise. In both cases, we consider the x-position of the intersection where the twisted version would intersect, and the actual vertical section of the quadrilateral at that position (0 if twisted, or the weighted average of the vertical sides if straight).
Say we call the vertical distances b0 and b1. They are oriented (positive if y1 > y2). The intersection is at x-coordinate x + r * dx, where r = |b0| / (|b0| + |b1|) and is a factor between 0 and 1.
For a twisted quad, the left (triangular) area is b0*r*dx/2 and the right one is b1*(1-r)*dx/2.
For a straight quad, the left area (trapeze) is (b0 + br)/2 * r * dx and the right is (b1 + br) / 2 * (1 - r) * dx, where br is the height at the r horizontal proportion, and br = b0 * (1 - r) + b1 * r.
To generalize, we always use br in the calculation. For twisted quads, it is 0 and we can use the same expression as for straight quads. This is the key to eliminate any tests and produce a pure vectorized function.
The rest is a bit of numpy expressions to calculate all these values efficiently.
Example detail
def plot_details(details, ax=None):
x, y1, y2, dx, r, a = [details[k] for k in 'x y1 y2 dx r a'.split()]
ax = ax if ax else plt.gca()
ax.plot(x, y1, 'b.-')
ax.plot(x, y2, 'r.-')
xmid = x[:-1] + dx * r
[ax.axvline(xi) for xi in xmid]
xy1 = np.c_[x, y1]
xy2 = np.c_[x, y2]
for A,B,C,D,r,(a0,a1) in zip(xy1, xy2, xy1[1:], xy2[1:], r, a):
ACmid = A*(1-r) + C*r
BDmid = B*(1-r) + D*r
q0 = np.c_[A,ACmid,BDmid,B]
q1 = np.c_[ACmid,C,D,BDmid]
ax.fill(*q0, alpha=.2)
ax.fill(*q1, alpha=.2)
ax.text(*q0.mean(1), f'{a0:.3f}', ha='center')
ax.text(*q1.mean(1), f'{a1:.3f}', ha='center')
Taking the earlier example:
x = np.array([0,1,2])
y1 = np.array([1,0,3])
y2 = np.array([0,3,4])
details = {}
>>> areas(x, y1, y2, details)
(0.125, -3.125)
>>> details
{'x': array([0, 1, 2]),
'y1': array([1, 0, 3]),
'y2': array([0, 3, 4]),
'details': {...},
'dy': array([ 1, -3, -1]),
'b0': array([ 1, -3]),
'b1': array([-3, -1]),
'b': array([[ 1, -3],
[-3, -1]]),
'r': array([0.25, 0.75]),
'rr': array([[0.25, 0.75],
[0.75, 0.25]]),
'dx': array([1, 1]),
'h': array([[0.25, 0.75],
[0.75, 0.25]]),
'br': array([ 0. , -1.5]),
'a': array([[ 0.125 , -1.125 ],
[-1.6875, -0.3125]]),
'result': (0.125, -3.125)}
And:
plot_details(details)

Perhaps you can integrate the absolute difference of both arrays:
>>> np.trapz(np.abs(y2 - y1))
7.1417718350001

Cubic spline for non-monotonic data (not a 1d function)

I have a curve as shown below:
The x coordinates and the y coordinates for this plot are:
path_x= (4.0, 5.638304088577984, 6.785456961280076, 5.638304088577984, 4.0)
path_y =(0.0, 1.147152872702092, 2.7854569612800755, 4.423761049858059, 3.2766081771559668)
And I obtained the above picture by:
x_min =min(path_x)-1
x_max =max(path_x)+1
y_min =min(path_y)-1
y_max =max(path_y)+1
num_pts = len(path_x)
fig = plt.figure(figsize=(8,8))
#fig = plt.figure()
plt.suptitle("Curve and the boundary")
ax = fig.add_subplot(1,1,1)
ax.set_xlim([min(x_min,y_min),max(x_max,y_max)])
ax.set_ylim([min(x_min,y_min),max(x_max,y_max)])
ax.plot(path_x,path_y)
Now my intention is to draw a smooth curve using cubic splines. But looks like for cubic splines you need the x coordinates to be on ascending order. whereas in this case, neither x values nor y values are in the ascending order.
Also this is not a function. That is an x value is mapped with more than one element in the range.
I also went over this post. But I couldn't figure out a proper method to solve my problem.
I really appreciate your help in this regard

As suggested in the comments, you can always parameterize any curve/surface with an arbitrary (and linear!) parameter.
For example, define t as a parameter such that you get x=x(t) and y=y(t). Since t is arbitrary, you can define it such that at t=0, you get your first path_x[0],path_y[0], and at t=1, you get your last pair of coordinates, path_x[-1],path_y[-1].
Here is a code using scipy.interpolate
import numpy
import scipy.interpolate
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
path_x = numpy.asarray((4.0, 5.638304088577984, 6.785456961280076, 5.638304088577984, 4.0),dtype=float)
path_y = numpy.asarray((0.0, 1.147152872702092, 2.7854569612800755, 4.423761049858059, 3.2766081771559668),dtype=float)
# defining arbitrary parameter to parameterize the curve
path_t = numpy.linspace(0,1,path_x.size)
# this is the position vector with
# x coord (1st row) given by path_x, and
# y coord (2nd row) given by path_y
r = numpy.vstack((path_x.reshape((1,path_x.size)),path_y.reshape((1,path_y.size))))
# creating the spline object
spline = scipy.interpolate.interp1d(path_t,r,kind='cubic')
# defining values of the arbitrary parameter over which
# you want to interpolate x and y
# it MUST be within 0 and 1, since you defined
# the spline between path_t=0 and path_t=1
t = numpy.linspace(numpy.min(path_t),numpy.max(path_t),100)
# interpolating along t
# r[0,:] -> interpolated x coordinates
# r[1,:] -> interpolated y coordinates
r = spline(t)
plt.plot(path_x,path_y,'or')
plt.plot(r[0,:],r[1,:],'-k')
plt.xlabel('x')
plt.ylabel('y')
plt.show()
With output

For non-ascending x splines can be easily computed if you make both x and y functions of another parameter t: x(t), y(t).
In your case you have 5 points so t should be just enumeration of these points, i.e. t = 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 for 5 points.
So if x = [5, 2, 7, 3, 6] then x(t) = x(0) = 5, x(1) = 2, x(2) = 7, x(3) = 3, x(4) = 6. Same for y.
Then compute spline function for both x(t) and y(t). Afterwards compute values of splines in all many intermediate t points. Lastly just use all calculated values x(t) and y(t) as a function y(x).
Once before I implemented cubic spline computation from scratch using Numpy, so I use this code in my example below if you don't mind (it could be useful for you to learn about spline math), replace with your library functions. Also in my code you can see numba lines commented out, if you want you can use these Numba annotations to speed up computation.
You have to look at main() function at the bottom of code, it shows how to compute and use x(t) and y(t).
Try it online!
import numpy as np, matplotlib.pyplot as plt
# Solves linear system given by Tridiagonal Matrix
# Helper for calculating cubic splines
##numba.njit(cache = True, fastmath = True, inline = 'always')
def tri_diag_solve(A, B, C, F):
n = B.size
assert A.ndim == B.ndim == C.ndim == F.ndim == 1 and (
A.size == B.size == C.size == F.size == n
) #, (A.shape, B.shape, C.shape, F.shape)
Bs, Fs = np.zeros_like(B), np.zeros_like(F)
Bs[0], Fs[0] = B[0], F[0]
for i in range(1, n):
Bs[i] = B[i] - A[i] / Bs[i - 1] * C[i - 1]
Fs[i] = F[i] - A[i] / Bs[i - 1] * Fs[i - 1]
x = np.zeros_like(B)
x[-1] = Fs[-1] / Bs[-1]
for i in range(n - 2, -1, -1):
x[i] = (Fs[i] - C[i] * x[i + 1]) / Bs[i]
return x
# Calculate cubic spline params
##numba.njit(cache = True, fastmath = True, inline = 'always')
def calc_spline_params(x, y):
a = y
h = np.diff(x)
c = np.concatenate((np.zeros((1,), dtype = y.dtype),
np.append(tri_diag_solve(h[:-1], (h[:-1] + h[1:]) * 2, h[1:],
((a[2:] - a[1:-1]) / h[1:] - (a[1:-1] - a[:-2]) / h[:-1]) * 3), 0)))
d = np.diff(c) / (3 * h)
b = (a[1:] - a[:-1]) / h + (2 * c[1:] + c[:-1]) / 3 * h
return a[1:], b, c[1:], d
# Spline value calculating function, given params and "x"
##numba.njit(cache = True, fastmath = True, inline = 'always')
def func_spline(x, ix, x0, a, b, c, d):
dx = x - x0[1:][ix]
return a[ix] + (b[ix] + (c[ix] + d[ix] * dx) * dx) * dx
# Compute piece-wise spline function for "x" out of sorted "x0" points
##numba.njit([f'f{ii}[:](f{ii}[:], f{ii}[:], f{ii}[:], f{ii}[:], f{ii}[:], f{ii}[:])' for ii in (4, 8)],
# cache = True, fastmath = True, inline = 'always')
def piece_wise_spline(x, x0, a, b, c, d):
xsh = x.shape
x = x.ravel()
ix = np.searchsorted(x0[1 : -1], x)
y = func_spline(x, ix, x0, a, b, c, d)
y = y.reshape(xsh)
return y
def main():
x0 = np.array([4.0, 5.638304088577984, 6.785456961280076, 5.638304088577984, 4.0])
y0 = np.array([0.0, 1.147152872702092, 2.7854569612800755, 4.423761049858059, 3.2766081771559668])
t0 = np.arange(len(x0)).astype(np.float64)
plt.plot(x0, y0)
vs = []
for e in (x0, y0):
a, b, c, d = calc_spline_params(t0, e)
x = np.linspace(0, t0[-1], 100)
vs.append(piece_wise_spline(x, t0, a, b, c, d))
plt.plot(vs[0], vs[1])
plt.show()
if __name__ == '__main__':
main()
Output:

Determining neighbours of cell as diamond shape in python

I have a matrix variable in size where 1 indicates the cell such as:
Cells = [[0,0,0,0,0],
[0,0,0,0,0],
[0,0,1,0,0],
[0,0,0,0,0],
[0,0,0,0,0],
]
I need to find neigbours in a parametric sized diamond shape. Not a box as answer given in here or not a fixed sized 1 diamond, answer given here. For example, N=2 I want to know the column, rows for below:
Mask = [[0,0,1,0,0],
[0,1,1,1,0],
[1,1,0,1,1],
[0,1,1,1,0],
[0,0,1,0,0],
]
The function should receive x and y for the requested column and row, (for above I will input 2,2) and N (input 2) the size of diamond. The function should return list of tuples (x,y) for the given diamond size.
I struggled at defining the shape as a function of x, y and k in for loops. I need to know both numpy (if there is anything that helps) and non-numpy solution.

For an iterative approach where you just construct the diamond:
def get_neighbors(center, n=1):
ret = []
for dx in range(-n, n + 1):
ydiff = n - abs(dx)
for dy in range(-ydiff, ydiff + 1):
ret.append((center[0] + dx, center[1] + dy))
return ret
Result of get_neighbors((2, 2), 2):
[(0, 2), (1, 1), (1, 2), (1, 3), (2, 0), (2, 1), (2, 2), (2, 3), (2, 4), (3, 1), (3, 2), (3, 3), (4, 2)]
Or, for a recursive approach:
dirs = [(1, 0), (0, 1), (-1, 0), (0, -1)]
def add_tuples(a, b):
return tuple([x + y for (x, y) in zip(a, b)])
def get_neighbors(center, n=1, seen=set()):
seen.add(center)
if n <= 0:
return seen
for dir in dirs:
newpos = add_tuples(center, dir)
if newpos in seen:
continue
get_neighbors(newpos, n - 1, seen)
return seen

I would start by taking out a "sub-matrix" that is the smallest square that can contain your result cells. This is the part that numpy should be able to help with.
Then define a function that calculates the manhattan distance between two cells (abs(x - x_p) + abs(y - y_p)) and iterate through the cells of your sub-matrix and return the values with a manhattan distance of less than N from your origin.

Make mask with rotation
Convolute cell and mask
Fix the result
import numpy as np
from scipy.ndimage import rotate, convolve
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
def diamond_filter(radius):
s = radius * 2 + 1
x = np.ones((s, s), dtype=int)
x[radius, radius] = 0
return rotate(x, angle=45)
def make_diamonds(x, radius):
filter = diamond_filter(radius)
out = convolve(x, filter)
out[out > 1] = 1
out -= x
out[out < 0] = 0
return out
def plot(x):
plt.imshow(x)
plt.show()
plt.close()
def main():
cell = np.random.choice([0, 1], size=(200, 200), p=[0.95, 0.05])
plot(diamond_filter(2))
plot(cell)
result = make_diamonds(cell, 2)
plot(result)
if __name__ == '__main__':
main()

Generate random locations within a triangular domain

I want to generate x and y having a uniform distribution and limited by [xmin,xmax] and [ymin,ymax]
The points (x,y) should be inside a triangle.
How can I solve such a problem?

Here's some code that generates points uniformly on an arbitrary triangle in the plane.
import random
def point_on_triangle(pt1, pt2, pt3):
"""
Random point on the triangle with vertices pt1, pt2 and pt3.
"""
x, y = sorted([random.random(), random.random()])
s, t, u = x, y - x, 1 - y
return (s * pt1[0] + t * pt2[0] + u * pt3[0],
s * pt1[1] + t * pt2[1] + u * pt3[1])
The idea is to compute a weighted average of the three vertices, with the weights given by a random break of the unit interval [0, 1] into three pieces (uniformly over all such breaks). Here x and y represent the places at which we break the unit interval, and s, t and u are the length of the pieces following that break. We then use s, t and u as the barycentric coordinates of the point in the triangle.
Here's a variant of the above that avoids the need to sort, instead making use of an absolute value call:
def point_on_triangle2(pt1, pt2, pt3):
"""
Random point on the triangle with vertices pt1, pt2 and pt3.
"""
x, y = random.random(), random.random()
q = abs(x - y)
s, t, u = q, 0.5 * (x + y - q), 1 - 0.5 * (q + x + y)
return (
s * pt1[0] + t * pt2[0] + u * pt3[0],
s * pt1[1] + t * pt2[1] + u * pt3[1],
)
Here's an example usage that generates 10000 points in a triangle:
pt1 = (1, 1)
pt2 = (2, 4)
pt3 = (5, 2)
points = [point_on_triangle(pt1, pt2, pt3) for _ in range(10000)]
And a plot obtained from the above, demonstrating the uniformity. The plot was generated by this code:
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
x, y = zip(*points)
plt.scatter(x, y, s=0.1)
plt.show()
Here's the image:
And since you tagged the question with the "numpy" tag, here's a NumPy version that generates multiple samples at once. Note that it uses the matrix multiplication operator #, introduced in Python 3.5 and supported in NumPy >= 1.10. You'll need to replace that with a call to np.dot on older Python or NumPy versions.
import numpy as np
def points_on_triangle(v, n):
"""
Give n random points uniformly on a triangle.
The vertices of the triangle are given by the shape
(2, 3) array *v*: one vertex per row.
"""
x = np.sort(np.random.rand(2, n), axis=0)
return np.column_stack([x[0], x[1]-x[0], 1.0-x[1]]) # v
# Example usage
v = np.array([(1, 1), (2, 4), (5, 2)])
points = points_on_triangle(v, 10000)

Ok, time to add another version, I guess. There is known algorithm to sample uniformly in triangle, see paper, chapter 4.2 for details.
Python code:
import math
import random
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
def trisample(A, B, C):
"""
Given three vertices A, B, C,
sample point uniformly in the triangle
"""
r1 = random.random()
r2 = random.random()
s1 = math.sqrt(r1)
x = A[0] * (1.0 - s1) + B[0] * (1.0 - r2) * s1 + C[0] * r2 * s1
y = A[1] * (1.0 - s1) + B[1] * (1.0 - r2) * s1 + C[1] * r2 * s1
return (x, y)
random.seed(312345)
A = (1, 1)
B = (2, 4)
C = (5, 2)
points = [trisample(A, B, C) for _ in range(10000)]
xx, yy = zip(*points)
plt.scatter(xx, yy, s=0.2)
plt.show()
And result looks like

Uniform on the triangle?
import numpy as np
N = 10 # number of points to create in one go
rvs = np.random.random((N, 2)) # uniform on the unit square
# Now use the fact that the unit square is tiled by the two triangles
# 0 <= y <= x <= 1 and 0 <= x < y <= 1
# which are mapped onto each other (except for the diagonal which has
# probability 0) by swapping x and y.
# We use this map to send all points of the square to the same of the
# two triangles. Because the map preserves areas this will yield
# uniformly distributed points.
rvs = np.where(rvs[:, 0, None]>rvs[:, 1, None], rvs, rvs[:, ::-1])
Finally, transform the coordinates
xmin, ymin, xmax, ymax = -0.1, 1.1, 2.0, 3.3
rvs = np.array((ymin, xmin)) + rvs*(ymax-ymin, xmax-xmin)
Uniform marginals? The simplest solution would be to uniformly concentrate the mass on the line (ymin, xmin) - (ymax, xmax)
rvs = np.random.random((N,))
rvs = np.c_[ymin + (ymax-ymin)*rvs, xmin + (xmax-xmin)*rvs]
but that is not very interesting, is it?

Find the shortest distance between a point and line segments (not line)

I have set of line segments (not lines), (A1, B1), (A2, B2), (A3, B3), where A,B are ending points of the line segment. Each A and B has (x,y) coordinates.
QUESTION:
I need to know the shortest distance between point O and line segments as shown in the shown figure implemented in line of codes. The code I can really understand is either pseudo-code or Python.
CODE: I tried to solve the problem with this code, unfortunately, it does not work properly.
def dist(A, B, O):
A_ = complex(*A)
B_ = complex(*B)
O_= complex(*O)
OA = O_ - A_
OB = O_ - B_
return min(OA, OB)
# coordinates are given
A1, B1 = [1, 8], [6,4]
A2, B2 = [3,1], [5,2]
A3, B3 = [2,3], [2, 1]
O = [2, 5]
A = [A1, A2, A3]
B = [B1, B2, B3]
print [ dist(i, j, O) for i, j in zip(A, B)]
Thanks in advance.

Here is the answer. This code belongs to Malcolm Kesson, the source is here. I provided it before with just link itself and it was deleted by the moderator. I assume that the reason for that is because of not providing the code (as an answer).
import math
def dot(v,w):
x,y,z = v
X,Y,Z = w
return x*X + y*Y + z*Z
def length(v):
x,y,z = v
return math.sqrt(x*x + y*y + z*z)
def vector(b,e):
x,y,z = b
X,Y,Z = e
return (X-x, Y-y, Z-z)
def unit(v):
x,y,z = v
mag = length(v)
return (x/mag, y/mag, z/mag)
def distance(p0,p1):
return length(vector(p0,p1))
def scale(v,sc):
x,y,z = v
return (x * sc, y * sc, z * sc)
def add(v,w):
x,y,z = v
X,Y,Z = w
return (x+X, y+Y, z+Z)
# Given a line with coordinates 'start' and 'end' and the
# coordinates of a point 'pnt' the proc returns the shortest
# distance from pnt to the line and the coordinates of the
# nearest point on the line.
#
# 1 Convert the line segment to a vector ('line_vec').
# 2 Create a vector connecting start to pnt ('pnt_vec').
# 3 Find the length of the line vector ('line_len').
# 4 Convert line_vec to a unit vector ('line_unitvec').
# 5 Scale pnt_vec by line_len ('pnt_vec_scaled').
# 6 Get the dot product of line_unitvec and pnt_vec_scaled ('t').
# 7 Ensure t is in the range 0 to 1.
# 8 Use t to get the nearest location on the line to the end
# of vector pnt_vec_scaled ('nearest').
# 9 Calculate the distance from nearest to pnt_vec_scaled.
# 10 Translate nearest back to the start/end line.
# Malcolm Kesson 16 Dec 2012
def pnt2line(pnt, start, end):
line_vec = vector(start, end)
pnt_vec = vector(start, pnt)
line_len = length(line_vec)
line_unitvec = unit(line_vec)
pnt_vec_scaled = scale(pnt_vec, 1.0/line_len)
t = dot(line_unitvec, pnt_vec_scaled)
if t < 0.0:
t = 0.0
elif t > 1.0:
t = 1.0
nearest = scale(line_vec, t)
dist = distance(nearest, pnt_vec)
nearest = add(nearest, start)
return (dist, nearest)

Rather than using a for loop, you can vectorize these operations and get much better performance. Here is my solution that allows you to compute the distance from a single point to multiple line segments with vectorized computation.
def lineseg_dists(p, a, b):
"""Cartesian distance from point to line segment
Edited to support arguments as series, from:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/54442561/11208892
Args:
- p: np.array of single point, shape (2,) or 2D array, shape (x, 2)
- a: np.array of shape (x, 2)
- b: np.array of shape (x, 2)
"""
# normalized tangent vectors
d_ba = b - a
d = np.divide(d_ba, (np.hypot(d_ba[:, 0], d_ba[:, 1])
.reshape(-1, 1)))
# signed parallel distance components
# rowwise dot products of 2D vectors
s = np.multiply(a - p, d).sum(axis=1)
t = np.multiply(p - b, d).sum(axis=1)
# clamped parallel distance
h = np.maximum.reduce([s, t, np.zeros(len(s))])
# perpendicular distance component
# rowwise cross products of 2D vectors
d_pa = p - a
c = d_pa[:, 0] * d[:, 1] - d_pa[:, 1] * d[:, 0]
return np.hypot(h, c)
And some tests:
p = np.array([0, 0])
a = np.array([[ 1, 1],
[-1, 0],
[-1, -1]])
b = np.array([[ 2, 2],
[ 1, 0],
[ 1, -1]])
print(lineseg_dists(p, a, b))
p = np.array([[0, 0],
[1, 1],
[0, 2]])
print(lineseg_dists(p, a, b))
>>> [1.41421356 0. 1. ]
[1.41421356 1. 3. ]

The explanation is in the docstring of this function:
def point_to_line_dist(point, line):
"""Calculate the distance between a point and a line segment.
To calculate the closest distance to a line segment, we first need to check
if the point projects onto the line segment. If it does, then we calculate
the orthogonal distance from the point to the line.
If the point does not project to the line segment, we calculate the
distance to both endpoints and take the shortest distance.
:param point: Numpy array of form [x,y], describing the point.
:type point: numpy.core.multiarray.ndarray
:param line: list of endpoint arrays of form [P1, P2]
:type line: list of numpy.core.multiarray.ndarray
:return: The minimum distance to a point.
:rtype: float
"""
# unit vector
unit_line = line[1] - line[0]
norm_unit_line = unit_line / np.linalg.norm(unit_line)
# compute the perpendicular distance to the theoretical infinite line
segment_dist = (
np.linalg.norm(np.cross(line[1] - line[0], line[0] - point)) /
np.linalg.norm(unit_line)
)
diff = (
(norm_unit_line[0] * (point[0] - line[0][0])) +
(norm_unit_line[1] * (point[1] - line[0][1]))
)
x_seg = (norm_unit_line[0] * diff) + line[0][0]
y_seg = (norm_unit_line[1] * diff) + line[0][1]
endpoint_dist = min(
np.linalg.norm(line[0] - point),
np.linalg.norm(line[1] - point)
)
# decide if the intersection point falls on the line segment
lp1_x = line[0][0] # line point 1 x
lp1_y = line[0][1] # line point 1 y
lp2_x = line[1][0] # line point 2 x
lp2_y = line[1][1] # line point 2 y
is_betw_x = lp1_x <= x_seg <= lp2_x or lp2_x <= x_seg <= lp1_x
is_betw_y = lp1_y <= y_seg <= lp2_y or lp2_y <= y_seg <= lp1_y
if is_betw_x and is_betw_y:
return segment_dist
else:
# if not, then return the minimum distance to the segment endpoints
return endpoint_dist

Basic algorithm: pretend that you have lines, so oriented that A lies to the left of B when O lies above the line (mentally rotate the picture to match as needed).
Find closest point as normal. If the point is between A and B, you're done. If it's to the left of A, the closest point is A. If the point is to the right of B, the closest point is B.
The case when A, B, and O all lie on the same line may or may not need special attention. Be sure to include a few tests of this position.

On my side, I've found that the two other answers were broken, especially when the line is purely vertical or horizontal. Here is what I did to properly solve the problem.
Python code:
def sq_shortest_dist_to_point(self, other_point):
dx = self.b.x - self.a.x
dy = self.b.y - self.a.y
dr2 = float(dx ** 2 + dy ** 2)
lerp = ((other_point.x - self.a.x) * dx + (other_point.y - self.a.y) * dy) / dr2
if lerp < 0:
lerp = 0
elif lerp > 1:
lerp = 1
x = lerp * dx + self.a.x
y = lerp * dy + self.a.y
_dx = x - other_point.x
_dy = y - other_point.y
square_dist = _dx ** 2 + _dy ** 2
return square_dist
def shortest_dist_to_point(self, other_point):
return math.sqrt(self.sq_shortest_dist_to_point(other_point))
A test case:
def test_distance_to_other_point(self):
# Parametrize test with multiple cases:
segments_and_point_and_answer = [
[Segment(Point(1.0, 1.0), Point(1.0, 3.0)), Point(2.0, 4.0), math.sqrt(2.0)],
[Segment(Point(1.0, 1.0), Point(1.0, 3.0)), Point(2.0, 3.0), 1.0],
[Segment(Point(0.0, 0.0), Point(0.0, 3.0)), Point(1.0, 1.0), 1.0],
[Segment(Point(1.0, 1.0), Point(3.0, 3.0)), Point(2.0, 2.0), 0.0],
[Segment(Point(-1.0, -1.0), Point(3.0, 3.0)), Point(2.0, 2.0), 0.0],
[Segment(Point(1.0, 1.0), Point(1.0, 3.0)), Point(2.0, 3.0), 1.0],
[Segment(Point(1.0, 1.0), Point(1.0, 3.0)), Point(2.0, 4.0), math.sqrt(2.0)],
[Segment(Point(1.0, 1.0), Point(-3.0, -3.0)), Point(-3.0, -4.0), 1],
[Segment(Point(1.0, 1.0), Point(-3.0, -3.0)), Point(-4.0, -3.0), 1],
[Segment(Point(1.0, 1.0), Point(-3.0, -3.0)), Point(1, 2), 1],
[Segment(Point(1.0, 1.0), Point(-3.0, -3.0)), Point(2, 1), 1],
[Segment(Point(1.0, 1.0), Point(-3.0, -3.0)), Point(-3, -1), math.sqrt(2.0)],
[Segment(Point(1.0, 1.0), Point(-3.0, -3.0)), Point(-1, -3), math.sqrt(2.0)],
[Segment(Point(-1.0, -1.0), Point(3.0, 3.0)), Point(3, 1), math.sqrt(2.0)],
[Segment(Point(-1.0, -1.0), Point(3.0, 3.0)), Point(1, 3), math.sqrt(2.0)],
[Segment(Point(1.0, 1.0), Point(3.0, 3.0)), Point(3, 1), math.sqrt(2.0)],
[Segment(Point(1.0, 1.0), Point(3.0, 3.0)), Point(1, 3), math.sqrt(2.0)]
]
for i, (segment, point, answer) in enumerate(segments_and_point_and_answer):
result = segment.shortest_dist_to_point(point)
self.assertAlmostEqual(result, answer, delta=0.001, msg=str((i, segment, point, answer)))
Note: I assume this function is inside a Segment class.
In case your line is infinite, don't limit the lerp from 0 to 1 only, but still at least provide two distinct a and b points.

I had to solve this problem as well, so for the sake of availability I'll post my code here. I did some cursory validation but nothing particularly serious. Your question actually helped me identify a bug in mine where a vertical or horizontal line segment would have broken the code and bypassed the intersection point on segment logic.
from math import sqrt
def dist_to_segment(ax, ay, bx, by, cx, cy):
"""
Computes the minimum distance between a point (cx, cy) and a line segment with endpoints (ax, ay) and (bx, by).
:param ax: endpoint 1, x-coordinate
:param ay: endpoint 1, y-coordinate
:param bx: endpoint 2, x-coordinate
:param by: endpoint 2, y-coordinate
:param cx: point, x-coordinate
:param cy: point, x-coordinate
:return: minimum distance between point and line segment
"""
# avoid divide by zero error
a = max(by - ay, 0.00001)
b = max(ax - bx, 0.00001)
# compute the perpendicular distance to the theoretical infinite line
dl = abs(a * cx + b * cy - b * ay - a * ax) / sqrt(a**2 + b**2)
# compute the intersection point
x = ((a / b) * ax + ay + (b / a) * cx - cy) / ((b / a) + (a / b))
y = -1 * (a / b) * (x - ax) + ay
# decide if the intersection point falls on the line segment
if (ax <= x <= bx or bx <= x <= ax) and (ay <= y <= by or by <= y <= ay):
return dl
else:
# if it does not, then return the minimum distance to the segment endpoints
return min(sqrt((ax - cx)**2 + (ay - cy)**2), sqrt((bx - cx)**2 + (by - cy)**2))