I would like to set the gap between each bar inside this example to a fixed max number.
So no matter how many bars are present in the polar, the gap should never be larger than 12px. Actually I tried to use the barGap prop, but this does not work.
Related
I'm confused with the bar with adjustment in MATLAB, for example, when use bar like:
bar(randsample(0:0.0001:1,100),randn(100,1))
I get an image like this:
It seems like the bar is too thin to have a good look. After searching for help, I can use the code like:
bar(randsample(0:0.0001:1,100),randn(100,1),50)
and I get this:
Seems much better. But if I change the sample number from 100 to 10, the same code won't work.
bar(randsample(0:0.0001:1,10),randn(10,1),50)
I hope I have explained my issue clear. It seems like the third parameter of the bar function is a relative width, which correlates to the input size of the first and second parameter. Can I fix the absolute bar width no matter how many data points input? or there is a better function to draw figures like this? Thanks a lot for any help!
user #am304 is right about the width parameter
What happened in your code is that you set x values to results from randsample(0:0.0001:1,10)
If you give your plot a width of 1 it means that 2 bars which are directly next to each other would touch each other with an equally spaced x.
In your case, you have an irregular x spacing.
The width of the bar is determined by the minimum distance between two x values (which you get from randsample()). Sometimes this space - and therefore the width of your bar - is very tiny. Sometimes it is broader.
Change the with to 1 and make multiple plots. You will notice that two are always touching each other and no one is overlapping and all the others have spaces in between. If you change the width to 50 the plots will somethimes overlap heavily (depending on the randomness from randsample) because your bars are 50 times bigger then the minimum width between two x values.
In case of your randsample(0:0.0001:1,100) example it is just more likely that two values are close to each other, therefore increasing the width helps you see something (because the bars overlap).
From the documentation:
bar(___,width) sets the relative bar width, which controls the
separation of bars within a group. Specify width as a scalar value.
Use this option with any of the input argument combinations in the
previous syntaxes.
The example provided is as follows:
Set the width of each bar to 40 percent of the total space available
for each bar.
y = [75 91 105 123.5 131 150 179 203 226 249 281.5];
bar(y,0.4)
So bottom line is: the width is specified as a % of the total space available for each bar. Yoru problem comes from the fact that you have far too many bars, so the space available for each bar is tiny. Setting the width to 50 or 5000% of the space available just means that each bar will overlap quite substantially on the neighbouring bars. Because you have so many, the middle plot looks "reasonable" as I suspect a lot of the bars are overlapped and a lot of them are at zero, so you just can't see them. If you go down to a sensible number of bars, as in your last example, then setting the width to 5000% looks ridiculous as you found out.
So to summarise: reduce the number of bars and specify the bar width between >0 and 1 (1 being no gap, all the bars touching each other).
A better way to plot things with random x locations is to use stem. By default, it draws a line from the zero line to the datum, with a circle representing each datum. But this can be modified. For example:
stem(randsample(0:0.0001:1,100),randn(100,1), 'Marker','none', 'LineWidth',4)
creates a plot similar to your second attempt, but with bars of a fixed width (4 points).
Leafletjs has a function pad(x) for increasing the latLng bounds. How do I shrink it? I've tried putting a negative number in there with little success.
I'm basically trying to see if a marker is within the current view, and if not center on that marker. But some markers can be plotted right on the edge of view and still be classed as in view. I'm trying to add inner padding on the current viewport bounds to avoid this.
if(!map.getBounds().pad(-1.5).contains(marker.getLatLng()))
You can use the paddingTopLeft, paddingBottomRight or padding options of L.Map's fitBounds method:
Sets the amount of padding in the top left corner of a map container that shouldn't be accounted for when setting the view to fit bounds. Useful if you have some control overlays on the map like a sidebar and you don't want them to obscure objects you're zooming to.
http://leafletjs.com/reference.html#map-paddingtopleft
map.fitBounds(layer, {'padding': [n, n]})
The negative value range for pad() is 0 to -0.5.
https://github.com/Leaflet/Leaflet/issues/5741
edit: link basically states that pad takes in a ratio of 1 not a typical percentage value. So to decrease the bounds by 50% (which would visually make it 0, because the left bounds would go in 50% to the middle, and the right bounds would also go in 50% to the middle, etc) the parameter value would be pad(-0.5) NOT pad(-50)
to increase add a positive ratio.
I've been working on adapting the stacked bar chart example (http://bl.ocks.org/mbostock/1134768). The problem I'm having is that there's
always outerpadding. The API lists the outer padding as a 3rd option, but omitting
it or setting it to 0 still leaves some padding. In most cases, it isn't too bad,
but with large data sets it tends to be a huge amount of padding. For all the code
relevant to my issue, you can check the link above. It's not very noticeable in that
example, but the first bar isn't drawn until about 12 pixels (in larger data sets I'm using
this can be at 100 or more pixels); I want it to start at 0 pixels.
Thanks! If you need any more explanation just let me know and I'll do my best.
EDIT: After testing, it appears rangeBands() starts at 0, but I'm still not sure why the rounding
from round bands would round as much as it did. Oh well, I can deal with using rangeBands.
I want to create a vertical bar plot. This is my code:
bar (x, sensiv);
title ('Promedio X')
xlabel('Nm')
ylabel('Refl.')
The problem is it looks like a stair plot. I've tried to add (x,sensiv, 'stacked') but it doesn't work. It looks grouped, as you can see in the next image:
graph http://imageshack.us/a/img689/9449/capturawv.jpg
I think it's because of x-axis but I couldn't change it. How can I do it? Does somebody knows how can I do it?
EDIT
Thanks Colin! I've tried to zoom and I understand what you mean and I've tried with different values, as slayton and you said.
I think that maybe it's the way I've code the plot, it is possible?
abc=0;
for p=(61:201)
abc(p)=out1_c;
end
for p=(151:301)
abc(p)=out2_c;
end
for p=(231:380)
abc(p)=out3_c;
end
for p=(381:596)
abc(p)=out4_c;
end
for p=(1152:1531)
abc(p)=out5_c;
end
for p=(1651:2051)
abc(p)=out7_c;
end
for p=(2052:2151)
abc(p)= 0;
end
The default value for the width of the bars in a bar plot is 0.8, so given that you're not currently specifying the width, you should have gaps in between each bar. This is going to sound really obvious, but have you tried zooming in on the bar plot that is created? For some datasets, the bar function will return a plot that looks like a stair plot, but in fact has gaps if you zoom in far enough. If this is the case, then you should be able to get the gaps you want by tinkering with the width parameter as suggested by slayton.
EDIT
Okay. First things first. If you want to post additional information, you should add it to your question, NOT post it as a new answer! You can do this by clicking the edit button just below where your question is on the page. To make things more readable, you might preface your edit with a capitalized bold-face heading "EDIT" as I have done here. If you are able, try now to move the additional information you've given back into your question, and then delete the answer.
Second, I have to be honest, the additional information you posted was somewhat confusing. However, I think I understand what you want now. You want 7 bars coming up to the heights out1_c, out2_c, ..., out7_c (variable names taken from your additional information) with a small gap between each bar, and the x-axis to reflect (approximately) the intervals 450-550, 550-650, etc.
Well, if you want 7 bars, then you want your input to only have seven elements. Set:
y = [out1_c; out2_c; out3_c; out4_c; out5_c; out6_c; out7_c];
y now gives you the heights your bars will come up to on the y-axis. To locate the bars on the x-axis, define a vector x that also has seven elements, where each element gives the midpoint of where you want the bar to be on the x-axis. For example:
x = [100; 200; 300; 400; 500; 600; 700];
Then just use bar(x, y). This should get you started.
A final point on the code you posted, you can actually completely avoid the loops: read up on vectorization. But if you are going to insist on loops, the first and most important rule is to preallocate your vectors/matrices. In your code abc starts out as a scalar (a 1 by 1 matrix), but then for every p, you are adding an element at index p. What is actually happening in the background is for every p, matlab is scrapping the current abc you have in memory, and building it again from scratch with the additional element. As you might expect, this will slow down your code by many orders of magnitude.
You can set the width of the individual bars by passing a value between 0 and 1 to bar. Passing 1 indicates that there should be no space between the bars
bar(x,y,1)
Passing anything less than 1 will reduce the bar sizes and introduce spacing between the individual bars
bar(x,y,.5)
I want to display overlapping boxplots using Sigmaplot 12. When I choose the scale for the x-axis as linear then the boxes do indeed overlap but are much too thin. See figure below. Of course they should be much wider.
When I choose the scale of the x-axis to be "category", then the boxes have the right width, but are arranged along each single x-value.
I want the position as in figure 1 and the width as in figure 2. I tried to resize the box in figure 1 but when I choose 100% in "bar width" than it still looks like Figure 1.
many thanks!
okay, I found the answer myself. In Sigmaplot, there is often the need to prepare "style"-columns, for example if you want to color your barcharts, you need a column that holds the specific color names.
For my boxplot example I needed a column that has the values for "width". These had to be quite large (2000) in order to have an effect. Why ? I have no idea. First I thought it would be because of the latitude values and that the program interprets the point as "1.000"s, but when I changed to values without decimals, it didn´t get better.
Well, here is the result in color.
Have fun !