Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I am trying to calculate the center of gravity of a polygon.

My problem is that I need to be able to calculate the center of gravity for both regular and irregular polygons and even self intersecting polygons.

Is that possible?

I've also read that: But this is restricted to non self intersecting polygons.

How can I do this? Can you point me to the right direction?

Sub-Question: Will it matter if the nodes are not in order? if for example you have a square shape and you name the top right point (X1Y1) and then the bottom right point (X3Y3)?

In other words if your shape is like 4-1-2-3 (naming the nodes from left to right top to bottom)

Note: Might be a stupid question but I'm not a maths student or anything!


share|cite|improve this question
Even if you have already accepted yoriki's answer, please tell us: what is a self intersecting polygon, how is it given, are parts of it counted twice or even negatively, and so on. – Christian Blatter Mar 11 '11 at 16:33
@Christian Blatter Have a look here: there are some examples of self intersecting polygons. I dont have a specific problem (a specific polygon) to solve I just need an algorithm that can be applied to every case! – mixkat Mar 11 '11 at 19:52
@Christian Blatter Same comment...I wrote an algorithm that given an arbitrary set of vertices would ideally form a non-self intersecting polygon! Im not sure if its correct though!Have a look if you can:…. Any comment would be appreciated! – mixkat Mar 11 '11 at 22:24
up vote 1 down vote accepted

I think your best bet will be to convert the self-intersecting polygon into a set of non-self-intersecting polygons and apply the algorithm that you linked to to each of them. I don't think it's possible to solve your problem without finding the intersections, and if you have to find the intersections anyway, the additional effort of using them as new vertices in a rearranged vertex list is small compared to the effort of finding them.

To answer your subquestion: Yes, the order of the nodes does matter, especially if the polygon is allowed to be self-intersecting since in that case the order is an essential part of the specification of the polygon and different orders specify different polygons -- for instance, the "square" with the ordering you describe would be the polygon on the right-hand side of the two examples of self-intersecting polygons that the page you linked to gives (rotated by $\pi/2$).

P.S.: I just realized that different orders can also specify different non-self-intersecting (but not convex) polygons, so the only case where you could specify a polygon by its vertices alone is if you know it's convex. But even then you have to use the vertices in the right order in the algorithm you linked to.

share|cite|improve this answer
To begin with thanks for the reply! I wrote an algorithm that given an arbitrary set of vertices would ideally form a non-self intersecting polygon! Im not sure if its correct though!Have a look if you can:…. Any comment would be appreciated! – mixkat Mar 11 '11 at 22:23

If you are given just a list of points $z_i=(x_i, y_i)$ $\>(1\leq i\leq n)$ then it is not immediate how these points should determine a certain polygon. Maybe you want the convex hull $C$ of these points. There are algorithms that accept your list as input and produce a second list $(w_i)_{1\leq i\leq m}$ (a subset of the $z_i$) containing the corners of $C$ in counter-clockwise order. Using this second list you can compute the area and centroid of $C$ by means of the formulas given in the quoted source.

These formulas come from an application of Green's theorem to $C$ and its boundary $\partial C$. It reads as follows: $${\rm area}(C)={1\over2}\int_{\partial C}(x\,dy- y\,dx).$$ If you apply this formula to an arbitrary closed curve, as, e.g., the piecewise linear curve $\gamma$ determined by the original $z_i$ you get very strange results: Every part enclosed by $\gamma$ is counted as many times as it is surrounded counterclockwise by $\gamma$.

share|cite|improve this answer
You lost me mate! Allow me to explain what I'm trying to do! Basically I want to calculate the closest meeting point for a group of people. The idea is that you would have more than 3 people scattered on a map and based on their coordinates you should calculate the closest meeting point. Then I suppose that the way you determine the polygon doesn't really matter or does it? In fact is it the centroid that I should be looking at or is there a different way to achieve that? – mixkat Mar 11 '11 at 22:33
@mixkat: Given your description of the problem, finding the centroid of the polygon your group forms seems like overkill. Treat each person like a point mass and find the center of mass of your collection of points as: $$\left(\frac{\sum_{i=0}^n x_i}{n}, \frac{\sum_{i=0}^n y_i}{n}\right).$$ – Eric Nitardy Mar 12 '11 at 3:38
@EricNitardy Yeah turns out that its actually a lot easier..Christian already gave me this answer in the corresponding thread in SO but thanks anyway!! – mixkat Mar 12 '11 at 10:54

This doesn't work for irregular polygons such as the following: X Y 3 0 3 50 0 50 0 56 3 80 28 80 28 0 3 0

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.