A is a given N x R xT array. I must split it horizontally to N sub-arrays of size L x M and then group each z together in an array K and take a mean.
For Example: A is the array rand(N,R,T)= rand( 16, 3 ,3); Now I am going to split it:
A=rand( 16, 3 ,3) : A(1,:,:), A(2,:,:), A(3,:,:), A(4,:,:), ... , A(16,:,:).
I have 16 slices.
B_1=A(1,:,:); B_2=A(2,:,:); B_3=A(3,:,:); ... ; B_16=A(16,:,:);
The next step is grouping together every 3 ( for example).
Now I am going create K_i as :
K_1(1,:,:)=B_1;
K_1(2,:,:)=B_2;
K_1(3,:,:)=B_3;
...
K_8(1,:,:)=B_14;
K_8(2,:,:)=B_15;
K_8(3,:,:)=B_16;
The average array is found as:
C_1=[B_1 + B_2 + B_3]/3
...
C_8= [ B_14 + B_15 + B_16] /3
I have implemented it as:
A_reshape = reshape(squeeze(A), size(A,2), size(A,3),2, []);
mean_of_all_slices = permute(mean(A_reshape , 3), [1 2 4 3]);
Question 1 I have checked by hand. It gives me a wrong result. How to fix it? [SOLVED]
EDIT 2 I need to simulate the following computation:
take a product each slice of the array K_i with another array P_p: It means:
for `K_1` is given `P_1`): `B_1 * P_1` , `B_2 * P_1`, `B_3 * P_1`
...
for `K_8` is given `P_8`): `B_14 * P_8` , `B_15 * P_8`, `B_16 * P_8`
I have solved!!!
Disclaimer: this answers a previous version of the question.
In cases such as this I would suggest relying on built-ins, which have a predictable behavior. In your case, this would be movmean (introduced in R2016a):
WIN_SZ = 2; % Window size for averaging
AVG_DIM = 1; % Dimension for averaging
tmp = movmean(A, WIN_SZ , AVG_DIM ,'Endpoints', 'discard');
C = tmp(1:WINDOW_SZ:end, :, :); % This only selects A1+A2, A3+A4 etc.
If your MATLAB is a bit older, this can also be done using convolution (convn, introduced before R2006):
WIN_SZ = 3;
tmp = convn(A, ones(WIN_SZ ,1)./WIN_SZ, 'valid'); % Shorter than A in dim1 by (WIN_SZ-1)
C = tmp(1:WINDOW_SZ:end, :, :); % dim1 size is: ceil((size(A,1)-(WIN_SZ-1))/3)
BTW, the step where you create B from slices of A can be done using
B = num2cell(A,[2,3]); % yields a 16x1 cell array of 1x3x3 double arrays
Related
I am trying to generate a matrix, that has all unique combinations of [0 0 1 1], I wrote this code for this:
v1 = [0 0 1 1];
M1 = unique(perms([0 0 1 1]),'rows');
• This isn't ideal, because perms() is seeing each vector element as unique and doing:
4! = 4 * 3 * 2 * 1 = 24 combinations.
• With unique() I tried to delete all the repetitive entries so I end up with the combination matrix M1 →
only [4!/ 2! * (4-2)!] = 6 combinations!
Now, when I try to do something very simple like:
n = 15;
i = 1;
v1 = [zeros(1,n-i) ones(1,i)];
M = unique(perms(vec_1),'rows');
• Instead of getting [15!/ 1! * (15-1)!] = 15 combinations, the perms() function is trying to do
15! = 1.3077e+12 combinations and it's interrupted.
• How would you go about doing in a much better way? Thanks in advance!
You can use nchoosek to return the indicies which should be 1, I think in your heart you knew this must be possible because you were using the definition of nchoosek to determine the expected final number of permutations! So we can use:
idx = nchoosek( 1:N, k );
Where N is the number of elements in your array v1, and k is the number of elements which have the value 1. Then it's simply a case of creating the zeros array and populating the ones.
v1 = [0, 0, 1, 1];
N = numel(v1); % number of elements in array
k = nnz(v1); % number of non-zero elements in array
colidx = nchoosek( 1:N, k ); % column index for ones
rowidx = repmat( 1:size(colidx,1), k, 1 ).'; % row index for ones
M = zeros( size(colidx,1), N ); % create output
M( rowidx(:) + size(M,1) * (colidx(:)-1) ) = 1;
This works for both of your examples without the need for a huge intermediate matrix.
Aside: since you'd have the indicies using this approach, you could instead create a sparse matrix, but whether that's a good idea or not would depend what you're doing after this point.
I have an application with an array of matrices. I have to manipulate the diagonals several times. The other elements are unchanged. I want to do things like:
for j=1:nj
for i=1:n
g(i,i,j) = gd(i,j)
end
end
I have seen how to do this with a single matrix using logical(eye(n)) as a single index, but this does not work with an array of matrices. Surely there is a way around this problem. Thanks
Use a linear index as follows:
g = rand(3,3,2); % example data
gd = [1 4; 2 5; 3 6]; % example data. Each column will go to a diagonal
s = size(g); % size of g
ind = bsxfun(#plus, 1:s(1)+1:s(1)*s(2), (0:s(3)-1).'*s(1)*s(2)); % linear index
g(ind) = gd.'; % write values
Result:
>> g
g(:,:,1) =
1.000000000000000 0.483437118939645 0.814179952862505
0.154841697368116 2.000000000000000 0.989922194103104
0.195709075365218 0.356349047562417 3.000000000000000
g(:,:,2) =
4.000000000000000 0.585604389346560 0.279862618046844
0.802492555607293 5.000000000000000 0.610960767605581
0.272602365429990 0.551583664885735 6.000000000000000
Based on Luis Mendo's answer, a version that may perhaps be more easy to modify depending on one's specific purposes. No doubt his version will be more computationally efficient though.
g = rand(3,3,2); % example data
gd = [1 4; 2 5; 3 6]; % example data. Each column will go to a diagonal
sz = size(g); % Get size of data
sub = find(eye(sz(1))); % Find indices for 2d matrix
% Add number depending on location in third dimension.
sub = repmat(sub,sz(3),1); %
dim3 = repmat(0:sz(1)^2:prod(sz)-1, sz(1),1);
idx = sub + dim3(:);
% Replace elements.
g(idx) = gd;
Are we already playing code golf yet? Another slightly smaller and more readable solution
g = rand(3,3,2);
gd = [1 4; 2 5; 3 6];
s = size(g);
g(find(repmat(eye(s(1)),1,1,s(3))))=gd(:)
g =
ans(:,:,1) =
1.00000 0.35565 0.69742
0.85690 2.00000 0.71275
0.87536 0.13130 3.00000
ans(:,:,2) =
4.00000 0.63031 0.32666
0.33063 5.00000 0.28597
0.80829 0.52401 6.00000
Suppose I have two arrays ordered in an ascending order, i.e.:
A = [1 5 7], B = [1 2 3 6 9 10]
I would like to create from B a new vector B', which contains only the closest values to A values (one for each).
I also need the indexes. So, in my example I would like to get:
B' = [1 6 9], Idx = [1 4 5]
Note that the third value is 9. Indeed 6 is closer to 7 but it is already 'taken' since it is close to 4.
Any idea for a suitable code?
Note: my true arrays are much larger and contain real (not int) values
Also, it is given that B is longer then A
Thanks!
Assuming you want to minimize the overall discrepancies between elements of A and matched elements in B, the problem can be written as an assignment problem of assigning to every row (element of A) a column (element of B) given a cost matrix C. The Hungarian (or Munkres') algorithm solves the assignment problem.
I assume that you want to minimize cumulative squared distance between A and matched elements in B, and use the function [assignment,cost] = munkres(costMat) by Yi Cao from https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/20652-hungarian-algorithm-for-linear-assignment-problems--v2-3-:
A = [1 5 7];
B = [1 2 3 6 9 10];
[Bprime,matches] = matching(A,B)
function [Bprime,matches] = matching(A,B)
C = (repmat(A',1,length(B)) - repmat(B,length(A),1)).^2;
[matches,~] = munkres(C);
Bprime = B(matches);
end
Assuming instead you want to find matches recursively, as suggested by your question, you could either walk through A, for each element in A find the closest remaining element in B and discard it (sortedmatching below); or you could iteratively form and discard the distance-minimizing match between remaining elements in A and B until all elements in A are matched (greedymatching):
A = [1 5 7];
B = [1 2 3 6 9 10];
[~,~,Bprime,matches] = sortedmatching(A,B,[],[])
[~,~,Bprime,matches] = greedymatching(A,B,[],[])
function [A,B,Bprime,matches] = sortedmatching(A,B,Bprime,matches)
[~,ix] = min((A(1) - B).^2);
matches = [matches ix];
Bprime = [Bprime B(ix)];
A = A(2:end);
B(ix) = Inf;
if(not(isempty(A)))
[A,B,Bprime,matches] = sortedmatching(A,B,Bprime,matches);
end
end
function [A,B,Bprime,matches] = greedymatching(A,B,Bprime,matches)
C = (repmat(A',1,length(B)) - repmat(B,length(A),1)).^2;
[minrows,ixrows] = min(C);
[~,ixcol] = min(minrows);
ixrow = ixrows(ixcol);
matches(ixrow) = ixcol;
Bprime(ixrow) = B(ixcol);
A(ixrow) = -Inf;
B(ixcol) = Inf;
if(max(A) > -Inf)
[A,B,Bprime,matches] = greedymatching(A,B,Bprime,matches);
end
end
While producing the same results in your example, all three methods potentially give different answers on the same data.
Normally I would run screaming from for and while loops in Matlab, but in this case I cannot see how the solution could be vectorized. At least it is O(N) (or near enough, depending on how many equally-close matches to each A(i) there are in B). It would be pretty simple to code the following in C and compile it into a mex file, to make it run at optimal speed, but here's a pure-Matlab solution:
function [out, ind] = greedy_nearest(A, B)
if nargin < 1, A = [1 5 7]; end
if nargin < 2, B = [1 2 3 6 9 10]; end
ind = A * 0;
walk = 1;
for i = 1:numel(A)
match = 0;
lastDelta = inf;
while walk < numel(B)
delta = abs(B(walk) - A(i));
if delta < lastDelta, match = walk; end
if delta > lastDelta, break, end
lastDelta = delta;
walk = walk + 1;
end
ind(i) = match;
walk = match + 1;
end
out = B(ind);
You could first get the absolute distance from each value in A to each value in B, sort them and then get the first unique value to a sequence when looking down in each column.
% Get distance from each value in A to each value in B
[~, minIdx] = sort(abs(bsxfun(#minus, A,B.')));
% Get first unique sequence looking down each column
idx = zeros(size(A));
for iCol = 1:numel(A)
for iRow = 1:iCol
if ~ismember(idx, minIdx(iRow,iCol))
idx(iCol) = minIdx(iRow,iCol);
break
end
end
end
The result when applying idx to B
>> idx
1 4 5
>> B(idx)
1 6 9
I have matrices:
a= 0.8147 0.1270 0.6324
0.9058 0.9134 0.0975
b= 0.2785 0.9649 0.9572
0.5469 0.1576 0.4854
0.9575 0.9706 0.8003
c = 0.1419 0.7922
0.4218 0.9595
0.9157 0.6557
and also I have another matrix
I= 1 3 1 1
2 1 3 2
I want to get d matrix such that
d= a(1,3) b(3,1) c(1,1)
a(2,1) b(1,3) c(3,2)
where indices come as two consecutive entries of I matrix.
This is one example I get. However, I get different size matrices for a,b,c,.. and I.
Added: I is m x (n+3) which includes indices, and other (n+2) matrices which have corresponding entries are X,A1,A2,...,An,Y. When n is given, A1,A2,...,An matrices are generated.
Can someone please help me to write Matlab code for this task?
You can do it with varargin. Assuming that your matrices are constructed such that you can form your desired output in the way you want (Updated according to Carmine's answer):
function out = IDcombiner(I, varargin)
out = zeros(size(I, 1), nargin-1);
idx = #(m, I, ii) (sub2ind(size(m), I(:, ii), I(:, ii+1)));
for ii = 1:1:nargin-1
out(:, ii) = varargin{ii}(idx(varargin{ii}, I, ii));
end
Now using this function you can make your selection on a flexible number of inputs:
out = IDcombiner(I, a, b, c)
out =
0.6324 0.9575 0.1419
0.9058 0.9572 0.6557
There is also a one-liner solution, which I do not recommend, since it dramatically decreases the readability of the code and doesn't help you gain much:
IDcombiner = #(I,varargin) ...
cell2mat(arrayfun(#(x) varargin{x}(sub2ind(size(varargin{x}), ...
I(:,x), I(:,x+1))), 1:nargin-1, 'UniformOutput', false));
Normally a matrix is not interpreted as a list of indices, but you can have this if you use sub2ind. To use it you need the size of the matrix you are addressing. Let's make an example starting with a:
a(sub2ind(size(a), I(:,1), I(:,2)))
The code does not change if you first assign the newly generated matrices to a variable name.
will use the column I(:,1) as rows and I(:,2) as columns.
To make the code more readable you can define an anonymous function that does this, let's call it idx:
idx = #(m,I,i)(sub2ind(size(m), I(:,i), I(:,i+1)))
So finally the code will be
d = [a(idx(a,I,1)), b(idx(b,I,2)), c(idx(c,I,3))]
The code does not change if you first assign the newly generated matrices to a variable name.
Other details
Let's make an example with 2 central matrices:
a = rand(3,1) % 3 rows, 1 column
b = rand(3,3) % 3 rows, 3 columns
c = rand(3,3) % another squared matrix
d = rand(3,1) % 3 rows, 1 column
The definition of the anonymous function is the same, you just change the definition of the output vector:
output = [a(idx(a,I,1)), b(idx(b,I,2)), c(idx(c,I,3)), d(idx(d,I,3))]
Keep in mind that following that pattern you always need a I matrix with (n_matrices + 1) columns.
Generalization
Let's generalize this code for a number n of central matrices of size rxr and for "side matrices" of size rxc. I will use some values of those parameters for this example, but you can use what you want.
Let me generate an example to use:
r = 3;
c = 4;
n = 3;
a = rand(r,c); % 2D array
b = rand(r,r,n); % 3D array, along z = 1:n you have 2D matrices of size rxr
c = rand(r,c);
I = [1 3 1 2 1 3; 2 1 3 1 1 1];
The code I wrote can easily be extended using cat to append matrices (note the 2 in the function tells MATLAB to append on the direction of the columns) and a for cycle:
idx = #(m,I,i)(sub2ind(size(m), I(:,i), I(:,i+1)))
d = a(idx(a,I,1));
for i = 1:n
temp = b(:,:,i);
d = cat(2,d,temp(idx(tmp,I,i+1)));
end
d = cat(2,d,c(idx(c,I,n+1)));
If you really don't want to address anything "by hand", you can use cell arrays to put all the matrices together and then cyclically apply the anonymous function to each matrix in the cell array.
Hi I have an three dimensional octave array A of size [x y z]
Now I have another array B of dimensions n * 3
say B(0) gives [3 3 1]
I need to access that location in A ie A(3, 3, 1) = say 15
something like A(B(0))
How do I go about it?
See the help for sub2ind (and ind2sub).
However, nowadays people recommend to use loops.
Well, first, B(0) is invalid index, as addressing in MATLAB and Octave begins from 1. Other issue is that you want that B(0) would contain a vector [3 3 1 ]. Matrices in MATLAB can not contain other matrices, only scalars. So you need to use a 3x3 cell array, a 3x3 struct or a 4-dimensional array. I'll choose here the cell array option, because I find it easiest and most convenient.
% Set random seed (used only for example data generation).
rng(123456789);
% Let's generate some pseudo-random example data.
A = rand(3,3,3);
A(:,:,1) =
0.5328 0.7136 0.8839
0.5341 0.2570 0.1549
0.5096 0.7527 0.6705
A(:,:,2) =
0.6434 0.8185 0.2308
0.7236 0.0979 0.0123
0.7487 0.0036 0.3535
A(:,:,3) =
0.1853 0.8994 0.9803
0.7928 0.3154 0.5421
0.6122 0.4067 0.2423
% Generate an example 3x3x3 cell array of indices, filled with pseudo-random 1x3 index vectors.
CellArrayOfIndicesB = cellfun(#(x) randi(3,1,3), num2cell(zeros(3,3,3)), 'UniformOutput', false);
% Example #1. Coordinates (1,2,3).
Dim1 = 1;
Dim2 = 2;
Dim3 = 3;
% The code to get the corresponding value of A directly.
ValueOfA = A(CellArrayOfIndicesB{Dim1,Dim2,Dim3}(1), CellArrayOfIndicesB{Dim1,Dim2,Dim3}(2), CellArrayOfIndicesB{Dim1,Dim2,Dim3}(3));
ValueOfA =
0.8839
% Let's confirm that by first checking where CellArrayOfIndicesB{1,2,3} points to.
CellArrayOfIndicesB{1,2,3}
ans =
[ 1 3 1 ]
% CellArrayOfIndicesB{1,2,3} points to A(1,3,1).
% So let's see what is the value of A(1,3,1).
A(1,3,1)
ans =
0.8839
% Example #2. Coordinates (3,1,2).
Dim1 = 3;
Dim2 = 1;
Dim3 = 2;
ValueOfA = A(CellArrayOfIndicesB{Dim1,Dim2,Dim3}(1), CellArrayOfIndicesB{Dim1,Dim2,Dim3}(2), CellArrayOfIndicesB{Dim1,Dim2,Dim3}(3));
ValueOfA =
0.4067
CellArrayOfIndicesB{3,1,2}
ans =
[ 3 2 3 ]
A(3,2,3)
ans =
0.4067