feat: implement resampling within xSampling to handle array lengths larger than the original size

[josoriom]

No description provided.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (6c2a8bb) 91.69% compared to head (48f89bc) 91.70%.

❗ Current head 48f89bc differs from pull request most recent head 32a5c04. Consider uploading reports for the commit 32a5c04 to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #200      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   91.69%   91.70%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         168      168              
  Lines        3286     3305      +19     
  Branches      824      824              
==========================================
+ Hits         3013     3031      +18     
- Misses        266      267       +1     
  Partials        7        7              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[josoriom]

@lpatiny I found a function (xSampling) in this package that performs down-sampling

[lpatiny]

I would like you add the following test case (and I'm not convinced about the current result). Not sure what you expect the algorithm to do.

xSampling([0], { length: 2 });
xSampling([1, 2], { length: 3 });
xSampling([1, 2], { length: 5 });
xSampling([1, 2, 3], { length: 5 });
xSampling([1, 2, 4], { length: 5 });
xSampling([1, 2, 4], { length: 7 });
xSampling([1, 2, 3], { length: 4 });
xSampling([1, 2, 4], { length: 4 });
xSampling([1, 2, 1], { length: 4 });
xSampling([1, 2, -1], { length: 5 });

Do you have a reference link to the current implementation because the results seems difficult to justify.

[josoriom]

I would like you add the following test case (and I'm not convinced about the current result). Not sure what you expect the algorithm to do.

xSampling([0], { length: 2 });
xSampling([1, 2], { length: 3 });
xSampling([1, 2], { length: 5 });
xSampling([1, 2, 3], { length: 5 });
xSampling([1, 2, 4], { length: 5 });
xSampling([1, 2, 4], { length: 7 });
xSampling([1, 2, 3], { length: 4 });
xSampling([1, 2, 4], { length: 4 });
xSampling([1, 2, 1], { length: 4 });
xSampling([1, 2, -1], { length: 5 });

Do you have a reference link to the current implementation because the results seems difficult to justify.

Defining the step size was where I made the mistake.
The source from wikipedia Linear interpolation

$$ y = y_0 \cdot \left(1 - \frac{x - x_0}{x_1 - x_0}\right) + y_1 \cdot \frac{x - x_0}{x_1 - x_0} $$

result[i] = array[floor] * (1 - diff) + array[ceil] * diff;

where

let diff = currentIndex - floor;

and

ceil - floor = 1