I fail to understand why, in the below example, only x1 turns into a 1000 column array while y is a single number.
x = [0:1:999];
y = (7.5*(x))/(18000+(x));
x1 = exp(-((x)*8)/333);
Any clarification would be highly appreciated!
Why is x1 1x1000?
As given in the documentation,
exp(X) returns the exponential eˣ for each element in array X.
Since x is 1x1000, so -(x*8)/333 is 1x1000 and when exp() is applied on it, exponentials of all 1000 elements are computed and hence x1 is also 1x1000. As an example, exp([1 2 3]) is same as [exp(1) exp(2) exp(3)].
Why is y a single number?
As given in the documentation,
If A is a rectangular m-by-n matrix with m~= n, and B is a matrix
with n columns, then x = B/A returns a least-squares solution of the
system of equations x*A = B.
In your case,
A is 18000+x and size(18000+x) is 1x1000 i.e. m=1 and n=1000, and m~=n
and B is 7.5*x which has n=1000 columns.
⇒(7.5*x)/(18000+x) is returning you least-squares solution of equations x*(18000+x) = 7.5*x.
Final Remarks:
x = [0:1:999];
Brackets are unnecessary here and it should better be use like this: x=0:1:999 ;
It seems that you want to do element-wise division for computing x1 for which you should use ./ operator like this:
y=(7.5*x)./(18000+x); %Also removed unnecessary brackets
Also note that addition is always element-wise. .+ is not a valid MATLAB syntax (It works in Octave though). See valid arithmetic array and matrix operators in MATLAB here.
3. x1 also has some unnecessary brackets.
The question has already been answered by other people. I just want to point out a small thing. You do not need to write x = 0:1:999. It is better written as x = 0:999 as the default increment value used by MATLAB or Octave is 1.
Try explicitly specifying that you want to do element-wise operations rather than matrix operations:
y = (7.5.*(x))./(18000+(x));
In general, .* does elementwise multiplication, ./ does element-wise division, etc. So [1 2] .* [3 4] yields [3 8]. Omitting the dots will cause Matlab to use matrix operations whenever it can find a reasonable interpretation of your inputs as matrices.
Related
This is probably a trivial question, but I want to select a portion of a complex array in order to plot it in Matlab. My MWE is
n = 100;
t = linspace(-1,1,n);
x = rand(n,1)+1j*rand(n,1);
plot(t(45):t(55),real(x(45):x(55)),'.--')
plot(t(45):t(55),imag(x(45):x(55)),'.--')
I get an error
Error using plot
Vectors must be the same length.
because the real(x(45):x(55)) bit returns an empty matrix: Empty matrix: 1-by-0. What is the easiest way to fix this problem without creating new vectors for the real and imaginary x?
It was just a simple mistake. You were doing t(45):t(55), but t is generated by rand, so t(45) would be, say, 0.1, and t(55), 0.2, so 0.1:0.2 is only 0.1. See the problem?
Then when you did it for x, the range was different and thus the error.
What you want is t(45:55), to specify the vector positions from 45 to 55.
This is what you want:
n = 100;
t = linspace(-1,1,n);
x = rand(n,1)+1j*rand(n,1);
plot(t(45:55),real(x(45:55)),'.--')
plot(t(45:55),imag(x(45:55)),'.--')
How can I plot the following function in MATLAB?
x = 0:20:200;
y = 1+((x/8)^(1/3))+((8/x)^(1/3));`
I tried it using plot(x,y), but it doesn't run any output. Any help?
You should change all operators that get x to elements-wise. this is done by adding . before the operator. So * is matrix multiplication, while .* is an element by element multiplication. This is true also for ^ and /. + and - are always element-wise. For .* the two inputs must be the same size and shape, or one of them is a scalar. For .^ and ./ it's better to always use them if you know that you are only dealing with array operations (unless both elements are scalars).
x = 0:20:200;
y = 1+((x./8).^(1/3))+((8./x).^(1/3));
plot(x,y)
Suppose I have an MxNx3 array A, where the first two indexes refer to the coordinates a point, and the last index (the number '3') refers to the three components of a vector. e.g. A[4,7,:] = [1,2,3] means that the vector at point (7,4) is (1,2,3).
Now I need to implement the following operations:
Lx = D*ux - (x-xo)
Ly = D*uy + (y-yo)
Lz = D
where D, ux, uy, xo, yo are all constants that are already known. Lx, Ly and Lz are the three components of the vector at each point (x,y) (note: x is the column index and y is the row index respectively). The biggest problem is about the x-xo and y-yo, as x and y are different for different points. So how to carry out these operations for an MxNx3 array efficiently, using vectorized code or some other fast methods?
thanks
You could use the meshgrid function from numpy:
import numpy as np
M=10
N=10
D=1
ux=0.5
uy=0.5
xo=1
yo=1
A=np.empty((M,N,3))
x=range(M)
y=range(N)
xv, yv = np.meshgrid(x, y, sparse=False, indexing='ij')
A[:,:,0]=D*ux - (xv-xo)
A[:,:,1]=D*uy - (yv-yo)
A[:,:,2]=D
If you want to operate on the X and Y values, you should include them in the matrix (or in other matrix) instead of relying in their indexes.
For that, you could use some of range creation routines from Numpy, specially numpy.mgrid.
Suppose that f(x,y) is a bivariate function as follows:
function [ f ] = f(x,y)
UN=(g)1.6*(1-acos(g)/pi)-0.8;
f= 1+UN(cos(0.5*pi*x+y));
end
How to improve execution time for function F(N) with the following code:
function [VAL] = F(N)
x=0:4/N:4;
y=0:2*pi/1000:2*pi;
VAL=zeros(N+1,3);
for i = 1:N+1
val = zeros(1,N+1);
for j = 1:N+1
val(j) = trapz(y,f(0,y).*f(x(i),y).*f(x(j),y))/2/pi;
end
val = fftshift(fft(val))/N;
l = (length(val)+1)/2;
VAL(i,:)= val(l-1:l+1);
end
VAL = fftshift(fft(VAL,[],1),1)/N;
L = (size(VAL,1)+1)/2;
VAL = VAL(L-1:L+1,:);
end
Note that N=2^p where p>10, so please consider the memory limitations while optimizing the code using ndgrid, arrayfun, etc.
FYI: The code intends to find the central 3-by-3 submatrix of the fftn of
fun=#(a,b) trapz(y,f(0,y).*f(a,y).*f(b,y))/2/pi;
where a,b are in [0,4]. The key idea is that we can save memory using the code above specially when N is very large. But the execution time is still an issue because of nested loops. See the figure below for N=2^2:
This is not a full answer, but some possibly helpful hints:
0) The trivial: Are you sure you need numerics? Can't you do the computation analytically?
1) Do not use function handles:
function [ f ] = f(x,y)
f= 1+1.6*(1-acos(cos(0.5*pi*x+y))/pi)-0.8
end
2) Simplify analytically: acos(cos(x)) is the same as abs(mod(x + pi, 2 * pi) - pi), which should compute slightly faster. Or, instead of sampling and then numerically integrating, first integrate analytically and sample the result.
3) The FFT is a very efficient algorithm to compute the full DFT, but you don't need the full DFT. Since you only want the central 3 x 3 coefficients, it might be more efficient to directly apply the DFT definition and evaluate the formula only for those coefficients that you want. That should be both fast and memory-efficient.
4) If you repeatedly do this computation, it might be helpful to precompute DFT coefficients. Here, dftmtx from the Signal Processing toolbox can assist.
5) To get rid of the loops, think about the problem not in the form of computation instructions, but a single matrix operation. If you consider your input N x N matrix as a vector with N² elements, and your output 3 x 3 matrix as a 9-element vector, then the whole operation you apply (numerical integration via trapz and DFT via fft) appears to be a simple linear transform, which it should be possible to express as an N² x 9 matrix.
I have a matrix, say F= magic(8), whose elements are indicesed by x and y in 1:N in both dimensions.
I have a (1-D) parameter that specifies a subset of the possible coordinates (x,y), i.e. x(b(k)) and y(b(k)) with size(b)=[M,1] give me
M coordinates (x(b(k)),y(b(k))) where I want to evaluate F.
Is it possible to access F((x(b(k)),y(b(k)))) for k=1:M without writing a for loop?
I am looking a quicker solution that running the loop
F= magic(8)
for k=1:M
do_something_on(F((x(b(k)),y(b(k)))))
end
Note that if I write
F((x(b(1:M)),y(b(1:M)))
I get a M x M matrix, where the diagonal elements are the ones I am looking for, but I rather do not build the whole M x M matrix to extract the diagonal.
Instead of F(x(b), y(b)) that is giving you a matrix, you can use:
arrayfun(#(bk) F(x(bk), y(bk)), b)
or:
F(sub2ind(size(F), x(b), y(b)))
I have probably found the solution, I have to use the vectorized form for the matrix F, that is F(:), and evaluate it in (y-1)*size(F,1)+x, i.e.
F((y(b)-1)*size(F,1)+x(b))