Vectorizing nested for loops in MATLAB? - matlab

I am studying a system of molecules consisting of atoms ("Sites" in the following code) and wish to construct the graph of just the molecules that are close to one another as defined by a distance criterion based on the atoms. The graph itself, though, is just supposed to show connections between the molecules as nodes.
How can I make this code more efficient? It is painfully slow. I imagine this isn't really a question about generating the graph, but about how to improve the nested for-loop structure of my code, plus the distance comparison given in matrix B.
I am working with MATLAB R2021b.
A % an array where column 1 is the atom ID, column 2 is the molecule ID, and columns 3-5 are the positions in x, y, and z
N = 200; % molecules in system
Sites = 150; % sites in each molecule
length = 120; % length of box on each side
SitesInSystem = N*Sites;
B = zeros(SitesInSystem,SitesInSystem);
for ii = 1:SitesInSystem
for jj = 1:SitesInSystem
if ii ~= jj % if not the same site
dx = A(jj,3) - A(ii,3);
dy = A(jj,4) - A(ii,4);
dz = A(jj,5) - A(ii,5);
% taking into account periodic boundaries
if (dx > length * 0.5)
dx = dx - length;
elseif (dx <= -length * 0.5)
dx = dx + length;
end
if (dy > length * 0.5)
dy = dy - length;
elseif (dy <= -length * 0.5)
dy = dy + length;
end
if (dz > length * 0.5)
dz = dz - length;
elseif (dz <= -length * 0.5)
dz = dz + length;
end
% calculate distances
B(ii,jj) = sqrt(dx^2+dy^2+dz^2);
end
end
end
B = triu(B); % to avoid double counting
for ii = 1:N % molecule
for jj = 1:Sites % site
for kk = 1:N
for mm = 1:Sites
if ii ~= kk % if not the same molecule
if (B(ii*jj,kk*mm) < 1.75) && (B(ii*jj,kk*mm) > 0)
% do a calculation, i.e., add edge ii-kk to a graph with N nodes
end
end
end
end
end
end

You should adopt par for to utilize all CPU cores in your machine.
Your first child loop (for jj = 1:SitesInSystem....) could be easily refactored to a par for.
P/s: Since I don't have enough reputation to comment, I post this as an answer.

Related

Speeding up code which integrates a 2D gpuArray matrix using Simpson's Rule

I have a (real) 2D gpuArray, which I am using as part of a larger code, and now am trying to also integrate the array using the Composite Simpson Rule inside my main loop (several 10000 iterations at least). A MWE looks like the following:
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% MAIN CODE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Ny = 501; % Dimensions of matrix M
Nx = 503; %
dx = 0.1; % Grid spacings
dy = 0.2; %
M = rand(Ny, Nx, 'gpuArray'); % Initialise a matrix
for k = 1:10000
% M = function1(M) % Apply some other functions to M
% ... etc ...
I = simpsons_integration_2D(M, dx, dy, Nx, Ny); % Now integrate M
end
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Integrator %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
function I = simpsons_integration_2D(F, dx, dy, Nx, Ny)
% Integrate the 2D function F with Nx columns and Ny rows, and grid spacings
% dx and dy using Simpson's rule.
% Integrate along x direction (vertically) --> IX is a vector afterwards
sX = sum( F(:,1:2:Nx-2) + 4*F(:,2:2:(Nx-1)) + F(:,3:2:Nx) , 2);
IX = dx/3 * sX;
% Integrate along y direction --> I is a scalar afterwards
sY = sum( IX(1:2:Ny-2) + 4*IX(2:2:(Ny-1)) + IX(3:2:Ny) , 1);
I = dy/3 * sY;
end
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
The operation of performing the integration is around 850 µs, which is currently a significant part of my code. This was measured using
f = #() simpsons_integration_2D(M, dx, dy, Nx, Ny);
t = gputimeit(f)
Is there a way to reduce the execution time for integrating the gpuArray matrix?
(The graphics card is the Nvidia Quadro P4000)
Many thanks
Assuming that the matrix has odd dimensions here is a way to optimize the function:
function I = simpsons_integration_2D(F, dx, dy, Nx, Ny)
sX = 2 * sum(F,2) + 2 * sum (F(:,2:2:(Nx-1)),2) - F(:,1) - F(:,Nx);
sY = dx/3 * (2 * sum(sX) + 2 * sum (sX(2:2:(Ny-1))) - sX(1) - sX(Ny));
I = dy/3 * sY;
end
EDIT
A more optimized solution using matrix multiplication:
function I = simpsons_integration_2D2(F, dx, dy, Nx, Ny)
mx = repmat (2, Nx, 1);
mx(2:2:(Nx-1)) = 4;
mx(1) = 1;
mx(Nx) = 1;
my = repmat (2, 1, Ny);
my(2:2:(Ny-1)) = 4;
my(1) = 1;
my(Ny) = 1;
I = (dx*dy/9) * (my * (F * mx));
end
If Nx and Ny are the same you need to compute only one of them mx or my:
function I = simpsons_integration_2D2(F, dx, dy, Nx, Ny)
mx = repmat (2, Nx, 1);
mx(2:2:(Nx-1)) = 4;
mx(1) = 1;
mx(Nx) = 1;
I = (dx*dy/9) * (mx.' * (F * mx));
end
If Nx and Ny are constant you can precompute mx outside the function and pass it as a function argument:
function I = simpsons_integration_2D2(F, dx, dy, mx)
I = (dx*dy/9) * (mx.' * (F * mx));
end
EDIT:
If both mx and my can be precomputed the problem is reduced to a dot product:
m = reshape (my.' .* mx.', 1, []);
function I = simpsons_integration_2D3(F, dx, dy, m)
I = (dx*dy/9) * (m * F(:));
end
Well I cannot test this for you but there are a few things that may help.
First the axis 1 and then the the axis 2 may make some difference in terms of locality of the modified terms (I don't know if to better or to worse).
function I = variation1(F, dx, dy, Nx, Ny)
% Sum each term separately, prevents the creation of a big intermediate matrix
% Multiply outside the summation does only Ny multiplications by 4 instead of Ny*Nx/2
sX = sum(F(:,1:2:Nx-2), 2) + 4*sum(F(:,2:2:(Nx-1)), 2) + sum(F(:,3:2:Nx), 2);
IX = dx/3 * sX;
sY = sum(IX(1:2:Ny-2), 1) + 4*sum(IX(2:2:(Ny-1)), 1) + sum(IX(3:2:Ny) , 1);
I = dy/3 * sY;
end
function I = variation2(F, dx, dy, Nx, Ny)
% a.
% Sum each term separately, prevents the creation of a big intermediate matrix
% Multiply outside the summation does only Ny multiplications by 4 instead of Ny*Nx/2
% b.
% Notice that the terms 2:3:NX-2 appear in two summations
% Saves Nx*Ny/2 additions at the expense of Ny multiplications by 2
sX = 2*sum(F(:,3:2:Nx-2), 2) + 4*sum(F(:,2:2:(Nx-1)), 2) + F(:,1) + F(:,Nx);
% saves Ny multiplications by moving the constant factor after the next sum
sY = 2*sum(sX(3:2:Ny-2), 1) + 4*sum(sX(2:2:(Ny-1)), 1) + sX(1) + sX(Ny);
I = (dy*dy/9) * sY;
end
function I = alternate_simpsons_integration_2D(F, dx, dy, Nx, Ny)
% Integrate the 2D function F with Nx columns and Ny rows, and grid spacings
% dx and dy using Simpson's rule.
% Notice that sum(F(:,1:2:Nx-2) + F(:,3:2:Nx)) have all but the end poitns repeated.
IX = 4*sum(F(:,2:2:Nx-1), 2) + 2 * sum(F(:,3:2:Nx-2) , 2) + F(:,1) + F(:,Nx);
disp(size(IX))
% Integrate along y direction --> I is a scalar afterwards
sY = 4*sum(IX(2:2:Ny-1)) + 2*sum(IX(3:2:Ny-2)) + IX(1) + IX(Ny);
I = dy*dy/9 * sY;
end
If you think it is better to make a single summation then you can do using the formula 2*(sum(2*F(2:2:end-1) + F(1:2:end-2)) + F(end) - F(1) that gives the same result but has Nx*Ny/2 less additions on the first integration. But these options have to be tested in your environment.
Transposed implementation
function I = transposed_simpsons_integration_2D(F, dx, dy, Nx, Ny)
sY = 2*sum(2*F(2:2:end-1, :) + F(1:2:end-2, :), 1) + F(end, :) - F(1, :);
sX = 2*sum(2*sY(2:2:end-1) + sY(1:2:end-2)) + sY(end) - sY(1);
I = dy*dy/9 * sX;
end
Using octave (usually slower than matlab) I get a run time of ~400us per iteration with. This is not the type of workload that will be interesting to run on the GPU. For comparison, randn about 10 times slower than this function.

Error in FDM for a coupled PDEs

Here is the code which is trying to solve a coupled PDEs using finite difference method,
clear;
Lmax = 1.0; % Maximum length
Wmax = 1.0; % Maximum wedth
Tmax = 2.; % Maximum time
% Parameters needed to solve the equation
K = 30; % Number of time steps
n = 3; % Number of space steps
m =30; % Number of space steps
M = 2;
N = 1;
Pr = 1;
Re = 1;
Gr = 5;
maxn=20; % The wave-front: intermediate point from which u=0
maxm = 20;
maxk = 20;
dt = Tmax/K;
dx = Lmax/n;
dy = Wmax/m;
%M = a*B1^2*l/(p*U)
b =1/(1+M*dt);
c =dt/(1+M*dt);
d = dt/((1+M*dt)*dy);
%Gr = gB*(T-T1)*l/U^2;
% Initial value of the function u (amplitude of the wave)
for i = 1:n
if i < maxn
u(i,1)=1.;
else
u(i,1)=0.;
end
x(i) =(i-1)*dx;
end
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
for j = 1:m
if j < maxm
v(j,1)=1.;
else
v(j,1)=0.;
end
y(j) =(j-1)*dy;
end
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
for k = 1:K
if k < maxk
T(k,1)=1.;
else
T(k,1)=0.;
end
z(k) =(k-1)*dt;
end
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% Value at the boundary
%for k=0:K
%end
% Implementation of the explicit method
for k=0:K % Time loop
for i=1:n % Space loop
for j=1:m
u(i,j,k+1) = b*u(i,j,k)+c*Gr*T(i,j,k+1)+d*[((u(i,j+1,k)-u(i,j,k))/dy)^(N-1)*((u(i,j+1,k)-u(i,j,k))/dy)]-d*[((u(i,j,k)-u(i,j-1,k))/dy)^(N-1)*((u(i,j,k)-u(i,j-1,k))/dy)]-d*[u(i,j,k)*((u(i,j,k)-u(i-1,j,k))/dx)+v(i,j,k)*((u(i,j+1,k)-u(i,j,k))/dy)];
v(i,j,k+1) = dy*[(u(i-1,j,k+1)-u(i,j,k+1))/dx]+v(i,j-1,k+1);
T(i,j,k+1) = T(i,j,k)+(dt/(Pr*Re))*{(T(i,j+1,k)-2*T(i,j,k)+T(i,j-1,k))/dy^2-Pr*Re{u(i,j,k)*((T(i,j,k)-T(i-1,j,k))/dx)+v(i,j,k)*((T(i,j+1,k)-T(i,j,k))/dy)}};
end
end
end
% Graphical representation of the wave at different selected times
plot(x,u(:,1),'-',x,u(:,10),'-',x,u(:,50),'-',x,u(:,100),'-')
title('graphs')
xlabel('X')
ylabel('Y')
But I am getting this error
Subscript indices must either be real positive integers or logicals.
I am trying to implement this
with boundary conditions
Can someone please help me out!
Thanks
To be quite honest, it looks like you started with something that's way over your head, just typed everything down in one go without thinking much, and now you are surprised that it doesn't work...
In the future, please break down problems like these into waaaay smaller chunks that you can individually plot, check, test, etc. Better yet, try simpler problems first (wave equation, heat equation, ...), gradually working your way up to this.
I say this so harshly, because there were quite a number of fairly basic things wrong with your code:
you've used braces ({}) and brackets ([]) exactly as they are written in the equation. In MATLAB, braces are a constructor for a special container object called a cell array, and brackets are used to construct arrays and matrices. To group things like in the equation, you always have to use parentheses (()).
You had quite a number of parentheses wrong, which became apparent when I re-grouped and broke up those huge unintelligible lines into multiple lines that humans can actually read with understanding
you forgot to take the absolute values in the 3rd and 4th terms of u
you looped over k = 0:K and j = 1:m and then happily index everything with k and j-1. MATLAB is 1-based, meaning, the first element of anything is element 1, and indexing with 0 is an error
you've initialized 3 vectors u, v and T, but then index those in the loop as if they are 3D arrays
Now, I've managed to come up with the following code, which runs OK and at least more or less agrees with the equations shown. But I think it still doesn't make much sense because I get only zeros out (except for the initial values).
But, with this feedback, you should be able to correct any problems left.
Lmax = 1.0; % Maximum length
Wmax = 1.0; % Maximum wedth
Tmax = 2.; % Maximum time
% Parameters needed to solve the equation
K = 30; % Number of time steps
n = 3; % Number of space steps
m = 30; % Number of space steps
M = 2;
N = 1;
Pr = 1;
Re = 1;
Gr = 5;
maxn = 20; % The wave-front: intermediate point from which u=0
maxm = 20;
maxk = 20;
dt = Tmax/K;
dx = Lmax/n;
dy = Wmax/m;
%M = a*B1^2*l/(p*U)
b = 1/(1+M*dt);
c = dt/(1+M*dt);
d = dt/((1+M*dt)*dy);
%Gr = gB*(T-T1)*l/U^2;
% Initial value of the function u (amplitude of the wave)
u = zeros(n,m,K+1);
x = zeros(n,1);
for i = 1:n
if i < maxn
u(i,1)=1.;
else
u(i,1)=0.;
end
x(i) =(i-1)*dx;
end
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
v = zeros(n,m,K+1);
y = zeros(m,1);
for j = 1:m
if j < maxm
v(1,j,1)=1.;
else
v(1,j,1)=0.;
end
y(j) =(j-1)*dy;
end
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
T = zeros(n,m,K+1);
z = zeros(K,1);
for k = 1:K
if k < maxk
T(1,1,k)=1.;
else
T(1,1,k)=0.;
end
z(k) =(k-1)*dt;
end
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% Value at the boundary
%for k=0:K
%end
% Implementation of the explicit method
for k = 2:K % Time loop
for i = 2:n % Space loop
for j = 2:m-1
u(i,j,k+1) = b*u(i,j,k) + ...
c*Gr*T(i,j,k+1) + ...
d*(abs(u(i,j+1,k) - u(i,j ,k))/dy)^(N-1)*((u(i,j+1,k) - u(i,j ,k))/dy) - ...
d*(abs(u(i,j ,k) - u(i,j-1,k))/dy)^(N-1)*((u(i,j ,k) - u(i,j-1,k))/dy) - ...
d*(u(i,j,k)*((u(i,j ,k) - u(i-1,j,k))/dx) +...
v(i,j,k)*((u(i,j+1,k) - u(i ,j,k))/dy));
v(i,j,k+1) = dy*(u(i-1,j,k+1)-u(i,j,k+1))/dx + ...
v(i,j-1,k+1);
T(i,j,k+1) = T(i,j,k) + dt/(Pr*Re) * (...
(T(i,j+1,k) - 2*T(i,j,k) + T(i,j-1,k))/dy^2 - Pr*Re*(...
u(i,j,k)*((T(i,j,k) - T(i-1,j,k))/dx) + v(i,j,k)*((T(i,j+1,k) - T(i,j,k))/dy))...
);
end
end
end
% Graphical representation of the wave at different selected times
figure, hold on
plot(x, u(:, 1), '-',...
x, u(:, 10), '-',...
x, u(:, 50), '-',...
x, u(:,100), '-')
title('graphs')
xlabel('X')
ylabel('Y')

Matlab/CUDA: ocean wave simulation

I've studied "Simulating Ocean Water" article by Jerry Tessendorf and tried to program the Statistical Wave Model but I didn't get correct result and I don't understand why.
In my program I tried only to create a wave height field at time t = 0 without any further changes in time. After execution of my program I got not what I was expecting:
Here's my source code:
clear all; close all; clc;
rng(11); % setting seed for random numbers
meshSize = 64; % field size
windDir = [1, 0]; % ||windDir|| = 1
patchSize = 64;
A = 1e+4;
g = 9.81; % gravitational constant
windSpeed = 1e+2;
x1 = linspace(-10, 10, meshSize+1); x = x1(1:meshSize);
y1 = linspace(-10, 10, meshSize+1); y = y1(1:meshSize);
[X,Y] = meshgrid(x, y);
H0 = zeros(size(X)); % height field at time t = 0
for i = 1:meshSize
for j = 1:meshSize
kx = 2.0 * pi / patchSize * (-meshSize / 2.0 + x(i)); % = 2*pi*n / Lx
ky = 2.0 * pi / patchSize * (-meshSize / 2.0 + y(j)); % = 2*pi*m / Ly
P = phillips(kx, ky, windDir, windSpeed, A, g); % phillips spectrum
H0(i,j) = 1/sqrt(2) * (randn(1) + 1i * randn(1)) * sqrt(P);
end
end
H0 = H0 + conj(H0);
surf(X,Y,abs(ifft(H0)));
axis([-10 10 -10 10 -10 10]);
And the phillips function:
function P = phillips(kx, ky, windDir, windSpeed, A, g)
k_sq = kx^2 + ky^2;
L = windSpeed^2 / g;
k = [kx, ky] / sqrt(k_sq);
wk = k(1) * windDir(1) + k(2) * windDir(2);
P = A / k_sq^2 * exp(-1.0 / (k_sq * L^2)) * wk^2;
end
Is there any matlab ocean simulation source code which could help me to understand my mistakes? Fast google search didn't get any results.
Here's a "correct" result I got from "CUDA FFT Ocean Simulation". I didn't achieve this behavior in Matlab yet but I've ploted "surf" in matlab using data from "CUDA FFT Ocean Simulation". Here's what it looks like:
I've made an experiment and got an interesting result:
I've taken generated h0 from "CUDA FFT Ocean Simulation". So I have to do ifft to transform from frequency domain to spatial domain to plot the graph. I've done it for the same h0 using matlab ifft and using cufftExecC2C from CUDA library. Here's the result:
CUDA ifft:
Matlab ifft:
Either I don't understand some aspects of realization of cufftExecC2C or cufftExecC2C and matlab ifft are different algorithms with different results.
By the way parameters for generating such surface are:
meshSize = 32
A = 1e-7
patchSize = 80
windSpeed = 10
Well that was definitely a funny exercise. This is a completely rewritten answer since you found the issues you were asking about by yourself.
Instead of deleting my answer, there is still merit in posting to help you vectorize and/or explain a few bits of code.
I completely rewrote the GUI I gave in my former answer in order to incorporate your changes and add a couple of options. It started to grew arms and legs so I won't put the listing here but you can find the full file there:
ocean_simulator.m.
This is completely self contained and it includes all the calculating functions I vectorized and list separately below.
The GUI will allow you to play with the parameters, animate the waves, export GIF file (and a few other options like the "preset", but they are not too ironed out yet). A few examples of what you can achieve:
Basic
This is what you get with the quick default settings, and a couple of rendering options. This uses a small grid size and a fast time step, so it runs pretty quickly on any machine.
I am quite limited at home (Pentium E2200 32bit), so I could only practice with limited settings. The gui will run even with the settings maxed but it will become to slow to really enjoy.
However, with a quick run of ocean_simulator at work (I7 64 bit, 8 cores, 16GB ram, 2xSSD in Raid), it makes it much more fun! Here are a few examples:
Although done on a much better machine, I didn't use any parallel functionality nor any GPU calculations, so Matlab was only using a portion of these specs, which means it could probably run just as good on any 64bit system with decent RAM
Windy lake
This is a rather flat water surface like a lake. Even high winds do not produce high amplitude waves (but still a lot of mini wavelets). If you're a wind surfer looking at that from your window on top of the hill, your heart is going to skip a beat and your next move is to call Dave "Man! gear up. Meet you in five on the water!"
Swell
This is you looking from the bridge of your boat on the morning, after having battled with the storm all night. The storm has dissipated and the long large waves are the last witness of what was definitely a shaky night (people with sailing experience will know ...).
T-Storm
And this was what you were up to the night before...
second gif done at home, hence the lack of detail ... sorry
To the bottom:
Finally, the gui will let you add a patch around the water domain. In the gui it is transparent so you could add objects underwater or a nice ocean bottom. Unfortunately, the GIF format cannot include an alpha channel so no transparency here (but if you export in a video then you should be ok).
Moreover, the export to GIF degrade the image, the joint between the domain border and the water surface is flawless if you run that in Matlab. In some case it also make Matlab degrade the rendering of the lighting, so this is definitely not the best option for export, but it allows more things to play within matlab.
Now onto the code:
Instead of listing the full GUI, which would be super long (this post is long enough already), I will just list here the re-written version of your code, and explain the changes.
You should notice a massive increase of speed execution (orders of magnitude), thanks to the remaining vectorization, but mostly for two reasons:
(i) A lot of calculations were repeated. Caching values and reusing them is much faster than recalculating full matrices in loops (during the animation part).
(ii) Note how I defined the surface graphic object. It is defined only once (empty even), then all the further calls (in the loop) only update the underlying ZData of the surface object (instead of re-creating a surface object at each iteration.
Here goes:
%% // clear workspace
clear all; close all; clc;
%% // Default parameters
param.meshsize = 128 ; %// main grid size
param.patchsize = 200 ;
param.windSpeed = 100 ; %// what unit ? [m/s] ??
param.winddir = 90 ; %// Azimuth
param.rng = 13 ; %// setting seed for random numbers
param.A = 1e-7 ; %// Scaling factor
param.g = 9.81 ; %// gravitational constant
param.xLim = [-10 10] ; %// domain limits X
param.yLim = [-10 10] ; %// domain limits Y
param.zLim = [-1e-4 1e-4]*2 ;
gridSize = param.meshsize * [1 1] ;
%% // Define the grid X-Y domain
x = linspace( param.xLim(1) , param.xLim(2) , param.meshsize ) ;
y = linspace( param.yLim(1) , param.yLim(2) , param.meshsize ) ;
[X,Y] = meshgrid(x, y);
%% // get the grid parameters which remain constants (not time dependent)
[H0, W, Grid_Sign] = initialize_wave( param ) ;
%% // calculate wave at t0
t0 = 0 ;
Z = calc_wave( H0 , W , t0 , Grid_Sign ) ;
%% // populate the display panel
h.fig = figure('Color','w') ;
h.ax = handle(axes) ; %// create an empty axes that fills the figure
h.surf = handle( surf( NaN(2) ) ) ; %// create an empty "surface" object
%% // Display the initial wave surface
set( h.surf , 'XData',X , 'YData',Y , 'ZData',Z )
set( h.ax , 'XLim',param.xLim , 'YLim',param.yLim , 'ZLim',param.zLim )
%% // Change some rendering options
axis off %// make the axis grid and border invisible
shading interp %// improve shading (remove "faceted" effect)
blue = linspace(0.4, 1.0, 25).' ; cmap = [blue*0, blue*0, blue]; %'// create blue colormap
colormap(cmap)
%// configure lighting
h.light_handle = lightangle(-45,30) ; %// add a light source
set(h.surf,'FaceLighting','phong','AmbientStrength',.3,'DiffuseStrength',.8,'SpecularStrength',.9,'SpecularExponent',25,'BackFaceLighting','unlit')
%% // Animate
view(75,55) %// no need to reset the view inside the loop ;)
timeStep = 1./25 ;
nSteps = 2000 ;
for time = (1:nSteps)*timeStep
%// update wave surface
Z = calc_wave( H0,W,time,Grid_Sign ) ;
h.surf.ZData = Z ;
pause(0.001);
end
%% // This block of code is only if you want to generate a GIF file
%// be carefull on how many frames you put there, the size of the GIF can
%// quickly grow out of proportion ;)
nFrame = 55 ;
gifFileName = 'MyDancingWaves.gif' ;
view(-70,40)
clear im
f = getframe;
[im,map] = rgb2ind(f.cdata,256,'nodither');
im(1,1,1,20) = 0;
iframe = 0 ;
for time = (1:nFrame)*.5
%// update wave surface
Z = calc_wave( H0,W,time,Grid_Sign ) ;
h.surf.ZData = Z ;
pause(0.001);
f = getframe;
iframe= iframe+1 ;
im(:,:,1,iframe) = rgb2ind(f.cdata,map,'nodither');
end
imwrite(im,map,gifFileName,'DelayTime',0,'LoopCount',inf)
disp([num2str(nFrame) ' frames written in file: ' gifFileName])
You'll notice that I changed a few things, but I can assure you the calculations are exactly the same. This code calls a few subfunctions but they are all vectorized so if you want you can just copy/paste them here and run everything inline.
The first function called is initialize_wave.m
Everything calculated here will be constant later (it does not vary with time when you later animate the waves), so it made sense to put that into a block on it's own.
function [H0, W, Grid_Sign] = initialize_wave( param )
% function [H0, W, Grid_Sign] = initialize_wave( param )
%
% This function return the wave height coefficients H0 and W for the
% parameters given in input. These coefficients are constants for a given
% set of input parameters.
% Third output parameter is optional (easy to recalculate anyway)
rng(param.rng); %// setting seed for random numbers
gridSize = param.meshsize * [1 1] ;
meshLim = pi * param.meshsize / param.patchsize ;
N = linspace(-meshLim , meshLim , param.meshsize ) ;
M = linspace(-meshLim , meshLim , param.meshsize ) ;
[Kx,Ky] = meshgrid(N,M) ;
K = sqrt(Kx.^2 + Ky.^2); %// ||K||
W = sqrt(K .* param.g); %// deep water frequencies (empirical parameter)
[windx , windy] = pol2cart( deg2rad(param.winddir) , 1) ;
P = phillips(Kx, Ky, [windx , windy], param.windSpeed, param.A, param.g) ;
H0 = 1/sqrt(2) .* (randn(gridSize) + 1i .* randn(gridSize)) .* sqrt(P); % height field at time t = 0
if nargout == 3
Grid_Sign = signGrid( param.meshsize ) ;
end
Note that the initial winDir parameter is now expressed with a single scalar value representing the "azimuth" (in degrees) of the wind (anything from 0 to 360). It is later translated to its X and Y components thanks to the function pol2cart.
[windx , windy] = pol2cart( deg2rad(param.winddir) , 1) ;
This insure that the norm is always 1.
The function calls your problematic phillips.m separately, but as said before it works even fully vectorized so you can copy it back inline if you like. (don't worry I checked the results against your versions => strictly identical). Note that this function does not output complex numbers so there was no need to compare the imaginary parts.
function P = phillips(Kx, Ky, windDir, windSpeed, A, g)
%// The function now accept scalar, vector or full 2D grid matrix as input
K_sq = Kx.^2 + Ky.^2;
L = windSpeed.^2 ./ g;
k_norm = sqrt(K_sq) ;
WK = Kx./k_norm * windDir(1) + Ky./k_norm * windDir(2);
P = A ./ K_sq.^2 .* exp(-1.0 ./ (K_sq * L^2)) .* WK.^2 ;
P( K_sq==0 | WK<0 ) = 0 ;
end
The next function called by the main program is calc_wave.m. This function finishes the calculations of the wave field for a given time. It is definitely worth having that on its own because this is the mimimun set of calculations which will have to be repeated for each given time when you want to animate the waves.
function Z = calc_wave( H0,W,time,Grid_Sign )
% Z = calc_wave( H0,W,time,Grid_Sign )
%
% This function calculate the wave height based on the wave coefficients H0
% and W, for a given "time". Default time=0 if not supplied.
% Fourth output parameter is optional (easy to recalculate anyway)
% recalculate the grid sign if not supplied in input
if nargin < 4
Grid_Sign = signGrid( param.meshsize ) ;
end
% Assign time=0 if not specified in input
if nargin < 3 ; time = 0 ; end
wt = exp(1i .* W .* time ) ;
Ht = H0 .* wt + conj(rot90(H0,2)) .* conj(wt) ;
Z = real( ifft2(Ht) .* Grid_Sign ) ;
end
The last 3 lines of calculations require a bit of explanation as they received the biggest changes (all for the same result but a much better speed).
Your original line:
Ht = H0 .* exp(1i .* W .* (t * timeStep)) + conj(flip(flip(H0,1),2)) .* exp(-1i .* W .* (t * timeStep));
recalculate the same thing too many times to be efficient:
(t * timeStep) is calculated twice on the line, at each loop, while it is easy to get the proper time value for each line when time is initialised at the beginning of the loop for time = (1:nSteps)*timeStep.
Also note that exp(-1i .* W .* time) is the same than conj(exp(1i .* W .* time)). Instead of doing 2*m*n multiplications to calculate them each, it is faster to calculate one once, then use the conj() operation which is much faster.
So your single line would become:
wt = exp(1i .* W .* time ) ;
Ht = H0 .* wt + conj(flip(flip(H0,1),2)) .* conj(wt) ;
Last minor touch, flip(flip(H0,1),2)) can be replaced by rot90(H0,2) (also marginally faster).
Note that because the function calc_wave is going to be repeated extensively, it is definitely worth reducing the number of calculations (as we did above), but also by sending it the Grid_Sign parameter (instead of letting the function recalculate it every iteration). This is why:
Your mysterious function signCor(ifft2(Ht),meshSize)), simply reverse the sign of every other element of Ht. There is a faster way of achieving that: simply multiply Ht by a matrix the same size (Grid_Sign) which is a matrix of alternated +1 -1 ... and so on.
so signCor(ifft2(Ht),meshSize) becomes ifft2(Ht) .* Grid_Sign.
Since Grid_Sign is only dependent on the matrix size, it does not change for each time in the loop, you only calculate it once (before the loop) then use it as it is for every other iteration. It is calculated as follow (vectorized, so you can also put it inline in your code):
function sgn = signGrid(n)
% return a matrix the size of n with alternate sign for every indice
% ex: sgn = signGrid(3) ;
% sgn =
% -1 1 -1
% 1 -1 1
% -1 1 -1
[x,y] = meshgrid(1:n,1:n) ;
sgn = ones( n ) ;
sgn(mod(x+y,2)==0) = -1 ;
end
Lastly, you will notice a difference in how the grids [Kx,Ky] are defined between your version and this one. They do produce slightly different result, it's just a matter of choice.
To explain with a simple example, let's consider a small meshsize=5. Your way of doing things will split that into 5 values, equally spaced, like so:
Kx(first line)=[-1.5 -0.5 0.5 1.5 2.5] * 2 * pi / patchSize
while my way of producing the grid will produce equally spaced values, but also centered on the domain limits, like so:
Kx(first line)=[-2.50 -1.25 0.0 1.25 2.50] * 2 * pi / patchSize
It seems to respect more your comment % = 2*pi*n / Lx, -N/2 <= n < N/2 on the line where you define it.
I tend to prefer symmetric solutions (plus it is also slightly faster but it is only calculated once so it is not a big deal), so I used my vectorized way, but it is purely a matter of choice, you can definitely keep your way, it only ever so slightly "offset" the whole result matrix, but it doesn't perturbate the calculations per se.
last remains of the first answer
Side programming notes:
I detect you come from the C/C++ world or family. In Matlab you do not need to define decimal number with a coma (like 2.0, you used that for most of your numbers). Unless specifically defined otherwise, Matlab by default cast any number to double, which is a 64 bit floating point type. So writing 2 * pi is enough to get the maximum precision (Matlab won't cast pi as an integer ;-)), you do not need to write 2.0 * pi. Although it will still work if you don't want to change your habits.
Also, (one of the great benefit of Matlab), adding . before an operator usually mean "element-wise" operation. You can add (.+), substract (.-), multiply (.*), divide (./) full matrix element wise this way. This is how I got rid of all the loops in your code. This also work for the power operator: A.^2 will return a matrix the same size as A with every element squared.
Here's the working program.
First of all - source code:
clear all; close all; clc;
rng(13); % setting seed for random numbers
meshSize = 128; % field size
windDir = [0.1,1];
patchSize = 200;
A = 1e-7;
g = 9.81; % gravitational constant
windSpeed = 100;
timeStep = 1/25;
x1 = linspace(-10, 10, meshSize+1); x = x1(1:meshSize);
y1 = linspace(-10, 10, meshSize+1); y = y1(1:meshSize);
[X,Y] = meshgrid(x,y); % wave field
i = 1:meshSize; j = 1:meshSize; % indecies
[I,J] = meshgrid(i,j); % field of indecies
Kx = 2.0 * pi / patchSize * (-meshSize / 2.0 + I); % = 2*pi*n / Lx, -N/2 <= n < N/2
Ky = 2.0 * pi / patchSize * (-meshSize / 2.0 + J); % = 2*pi*m / Ly, -M/2 <= m < M/2
K = sqrt(Kx.^2 + Ky.^2); % ||K||
W = sqrt(K .* g); % deep water frequencies (empirical parameter)
P = zeros(size(X)); % Cant compute P without loops
for i = 1:meshSize
for j = 1:meshSize
P(i,j) = phillips(Kx(i,j), Ky(i,j), windDir, windSpeed, A, g); % phillips spectrum
end
end
H0 = 1/sqrt(2) .* (randn(size(X)) + 1i .* randn(size(X))) .* sqrt(P); % height field at time t = 0
rotate3d on;
for t = 1:10000 % 10000 * timeStep (sec)
Ht = H0 .* exp(1i .* W .* (t * timeStep)) + ...
conj(flip(flip(H0,1),2)) .* exp(-1i .* W .* (t * timeStep));
[az,el] = view;
surf(X,Y,real(signCor(ifft2(Ht),meshSize)));
axis([-10 10 -10 10 -1e-4 1e-4]); view(az,el);
blue = linspace(0.4, 1.0, 25)'; map = [blue*0, blue*0, blue];
%shading interp; % improve shading (remove "faceted" effect)
colormap(map);
pause(1/60);
end
phillips.m: (I've tried to vectorize the computation of Phillips spectrum but I faced with a difficulty which I'll show further)
function P = phillips(kx, ky, windDir, windSpeed, A, g)
k_sq = kx^2 + ky^2;
if k_sq == 0
P = 0;
else
L = windSpeed^2 / g;
k = [kx, ky] / sqrt(k_sq);
wk = k(1) * windDir(1) + k(2) * windDir(2);
P = A / k_sq^2 * exp(-1.0 / (k_sq * L^2)) * wk^2;
if wk < 0
P = 0;
end
end
end
signCor.m: (This function is an absolutely mystery for me... I've copied it from "CUDA FFT Ocean Simulation" realization. Simulation works much worse without it. And again I don't know how to vectorize this function.)
function H = signCor(H1, meshSize)
H = H1;
for i = 1:meshSize
for j = 1:meshSize
if mod(i+j,2) == 0
sign = -1; % works fine if we change signs vice versa
else
sign = 1;
end
H(i,j) = H1(i,j) * sign;
end
end
end
The biggest mistake that I've done is that I used ifft instead of using ifft2, that's why CUDA ifft and Matlab ifft didn't match.
My second mistake was in this lines of code:
kx = 2.0 * pi / patchSize * (-meshSize / 2.0 + x(i)); % = 2*pi*n / Lx
ky = 2.0 * pi / patchSize * (-meshSize / 2.0 + y(j)); % = 2*pi*m / Ly
I should've write:
kx = 2.0 * pi / patchSize * (-meshSize / 2.0 + i); % = 2*pi*n / Lx
ky = 2.0 * pi / patchSize * (-meshSize / 2.0 + j); % = 2*pi*m / Ly
I've played a bit with parameters A, meshSize, patchSize and I came to the conclusion that:
Somehow plausible parameter of wave amplitude is A * (patchSize / meshSize), where A is nothing but a scaling factor.
For 'calm' patchSize / meshSize <= 0.5.
For 'tsunami' patchSize / meshSize >= 3.0.
Difficulty with a vectorization of Phillips spectrum:
I have 2 functions:
% non-vectorized spectrum
function P = phillips1(kx, ky, windDir, windSpeed, A, g)
k_sq = kx^2 + ky^2;
if k_sq == 0
P = 0;
else
L = windSpeed^2 / g;
k = [kx, ky] / sqrt(k_sq);
wk = k(1) * windDir(1) + k(2) * windDir(2);
P = A / k_sq^2 * exp(-1.0 / (k_sq * L^2)) * wk^2;
if wk < 0
P = 0;
end
end
end
% vectorized spectrum
function P = phillips2(Kx, Ky, windDir, windSpeed, A, g)
K_sq = Kx .^ 2 + Ky .^ 2;
L = -g^2 / windSpeed^4;
WK = (Kx ./ K_sq) .* windDir(1) + (Ky ./ K_sq) .* windDir(2);
P = (A ./ (K_sq .^ 2)) .* ( exp(L ./ K_sq) .* (WK .^ 2) );
P(K_sq == 0) = 0;
P(WK < 0) = 0;
P(isinf(P)) = 0;
end
After I compute P1 using phillips1 and P2 using phillips2 I plot their difference:
subplot(2,1,1); surf(X,Y,real(P2-P1)); title('Difference in real part');
subplot(2,1,2); surf(X,Y,imag(P2-P1)); title('Difference in imaginary part');
It perfectly illustrates that there's a huge difference between this 2 spectrums in real part.

Calculating a 2D joint probability distribution

I have many points inside a square. I want to partition the square in many small rectangles and check how many points fall in each rectangle, i.e. I want to compute the joint probability distribution of the points. I am reporting a couple of common sense approaches, using loops and not very efficient:
% Data
N = 1e5; % number of points
xy = rand(N, 2); % coordinates of points
xy(randi(2*N, 100, 1)) = 0; % add some points on one side
xy(randi(2*N, 100, 1)) = 1; % add some points on the other side
xy(randi(N, 100, 1), :) = 0; % add some points on one corner
xy(randi(N, 100, 1), :) = 1; % add some points on one corner
inds= unique(randi(N, 100, 1)); xy(inds, :) = repmat([0 1], numel(inds), 1); % add some points on one corner
inds= unique(randi(N, 100, 1)); xy(inds, :) = repmat([1 0], numel(inds), 1); % add some points on one corner
% Intervals for rectangles
K1 = ceil(sqrt(N/5)); % number of intervals along x
K2 = K1; % number of intervals along y
int_x = [0:(1 / K1):1, 1+eps]; % intervals along x
int_y = [0:(1 / K2):1, 1+eps]; % intervals along y
% First approach
tic
count_cells = zeros(K1 + 1, K2 + 1);
for k1 = 1:K1+1
inds1 = (xy(:, 1) >= int_x(k1)) & (xy(:, 1) < int_x(k1 + 1));
for k2 = 1:K2+1
inds2 = (xy(:, 2) >= int_y(k2)) & (xy(:, 2) < int_y(k2 + 1));
count_cells(k1, k2) = sum(inds1 .* inds2);
end
end
toc
% Elapsed time is 46.090677 seconds.
% Second approach
tic
count_again = zeros(K1 + 2, K2 + 2);
for k1 = 1:K1+1
inds1 = (xy(:, 1) >= int_x(k1));
for k2 = 1:K2+1
inds2 = (xy(:, 2) >= int_y(k2));
count_again(k1, k2) = sum(inds1 .* inds2);
end
end
count_again_fix = diff(diff(count_again')');
toc
% Elapsed time is 22.903767 seconds.
% Check: the two solutions are equivalent
all(count_cells(:) == count_again_fix(:))
How can I do it more efficiently in terms of time, memory, and possibly avoiding loops?
EDIT --> I have just found this as well, it's the best solution found so far:
tic
count_cells_hist = hist3(xy, 'Edges', {int_x int_y});
count_cells_hist(end, :) = []; count_cells_hist(:, end) = [];
toc
all(count_cells(:) == count_cells_hist(:))
% Elapsed time is 0.245298 seconds.
but it requires the Statistics Toolbox.
EDIT --> Testing solution suggested by chappjc
tic
xcomps = single(bsxfun(#ge,xy(:,1),int_x));
ycomps = single(bsxfun(#ge,xy(:,2),int_y));
count_again = xcomps.' * ycomps; %' 143x143 = 143x1e5 * 1e5x143
count_again_fix = diff(diff(count_again')');
toc
% Elapsed time is 0.737546 seconds.
all(count_cells(:) == count_again_fix(:))
I have written a simple mex function which works very well when N is large. Of course it's cheating but still ...
The function is
#include "mex.h"
void mexFunction(int nlhs, mxArray *plhs[], int nrhs, const mxArray *prhs[])
{
unsigned long int hh, ctrl; /* counters */
unsigned long int N, m, n; /* size of matrices */
unsigned long int *xy; /* data */
unsigned long int *count_cells; /* joint frequencies */
/* matrices needed */
mxArray *count_cellsArray;
/* Now we need to get the data */
if (nrhs == 3) {
xy = (unsigned long int*) mxGetData(prhs[0]);
N = (unsigned long int) mxGetM(prhs[0]);
m = (unsigned long int) mxGetScalar(prhs[1]);
n = (unsigned long int) mxGetScalar(prhs[2]);
}
/* Then build the matrices for the output */
count_cellsArray = mxCreateNumericMatrix(m + 1, n + 1, mxUINT32_CLASS, mxREAL);
count_cells = mxGetData(count_cellsArray);
plhs[0] = count_cellsArray;
hh = 0; /* counter for elements of xy */
/* for all points from 1 to N */
for(hh=0; hh<N; hh++) {
ctrl = (m + 1) * xy[N + hh] + xy[hh];
count_cells[ctrl] = count_cells[ctrl] + 1;
}
}
It can be saved in a file "joint_dist_points_2D.c", then compiled:
mex joint_dist_points_2D.c
And check it out:
% Data
N = 1e7; % number of points
xy = rand(N, 2); % coordinates of points
xy(randi(2*N, 1000, 1)) = 0; % add some points on one side
xy(randi(2*N, 1000, 1)) = 1; % add some points on the other side
xy(randi(N, 1000, 1), :) = 0; % add some points on one corner
xy(randi(N, 1000, 1), :) = 1; % add some points on one corner
inds= unique(randi(N, 1000, 1)); xy(inds, :) = repmat([0 1], numel(inds), 1); % add some points on one corner
inds= unique(randi(N, 1000, 1)); xy(inds, :) = repmat([1 0], numel(inds), 1); % add some points on one corner
% Intervals for rectangles
K1 = ceil(sqrt(N/5)); % number of intervals along x
K2 = ceil(sqrt(N/7)); % number of intervals along y
int_x = [0:(1 / K1):1, 1+eps]; % intervals along x
int_y = [0:(1 / K2):1, 1+eps]; % intervals along y
% Use Statistics Toolbox: hist3
tic
count_cells_hist = hist3(xy, 'Edges', {int_x int_y});
count_cells_hist(end, :) = []; count_cells_hist(:, end) = [];
toc
% Elapsed time is 4.414768 seconds.
% Use mex function
tic
xy2 = uint32(floor(xy ./ repmat([1 / K1, 1 / K2], N, 1)));
count_cells = joint_dist_points_2D(xy2, uint32(K1), uint32(K2));
toc
% Elapsed time is 0.586855 seconds.
% Check: the two solutions are equivalent
all(count_cells_hist(:) == count_cells(:))
Improving on code in question
Your loops (and the nested dot product) can be eliminated with bsxfun and matrix multiplication as follows:
xcomps = bsxfun(#ge,xy(:,1),int_x);
ycomps = bsxfun(#ge,xy(:,2),int_y);
count_again = double(xcomps).'*double(ycomps); %' 143x143 = 143x1e5 * 1e5x143
count_again_fix = diff(diff(count_again')');
The multiplication step accomplishes the AND and summation done in sum(inds1 .* inds2), but without looping over the density matrix. EDIT: If you use single instead of double, execution time is nearly halved, but be sure to convert your answer to double or whatever is required for the rest of the code. On my computer this takes around 0.5 sec.
Note: With rot90(count_again/size(xy,1),2) you have a CDF, and in rot90(count_again_fix/size(xy,1),2) you have a PDF.
Using accumarray
Another approach is to use accumarray to make the joint histogram after we bin the data.
Starting with int_x, int_y, K1, xy, etc.:
% take (0,1) data onto [1 K1], following A.Dondas approach for easy comparison
ii = floor(xy(:,1)*(K1-eps))+1; ii(ii<1) = 1; ii(ii>K1) = K1;
jj = floor(xy(:,2)*(K1-eps))+1; jj(jj<1) = 1; jj(jj>K1) = K1;
% create the histogram and normalize
H = accumarray([ii jj],ones(1,size(ii,1)));
PDF = H / size(xy,1); % for probabilities summing to 1
On my computer, this takes around 0.01 sec.
The output is the same as A.Donda's converted from sparse to full (full(H)). Although, as he A.Donda pointed out, it is correct to have the dimensions be K1xK1, rather than the size of count_again_fix in the OPs code that was K1+1xK1+1.
To get the CDF, I believe you can simply apply cumsum to each axis of the PDF.
chappjc's answer and using hist3 are all good, but since I happened to want to have something like this some time ago and for some reason didn't find hist3 I wrote it myself, and I thought I'd post it here as a bonus. It uses sparse to do the actual counting and returns the result as a sparse matrix, so it may be useful for dealing with a multimodal distribution where different modes are far apart – or for someone who doesn't have the Statistics Toolbox.
Application to francesco's data:
K1 = ceil(sqrt(N/5));
[H, xs, ys] = hist2d(xy(:, 1), xy(:, 2), [K1 K1], [0, 1 + eps, 0, 1 + eps]);
Called with output parameters the function just returns the result, without it makes a color plot.
Here's the function:
function [H, xs, ys] = hist2d(x, y, n, ax)
% plot 2d-histogram as an image
%
% hist2d(x, y, n, ax)
% [H, xs, ys] = hist2d(x, y, n, ax)
%
% x: data for horizontal axis
% y: data for vertical axis
% n: how many bins to use for each axis, default is [100 100]
% ax: axis limits for the plot, default is [min(x), max(x), min(y), max(y)]
% H: 2d-histogram as a sparse matrix, indices 1 & 2 correspond to x & y
% xs: corresponding vector of x-values
% ys: corresponding vector of y-values
%
% x and y have to be column vectors of the same size. Data points
% outside of the axis limits are allocated to the first or last bin,
% respectively. If output arguments are given, no plot is generated;
% it can be reproduced by "imagesc(ys, xs, H'); axis xy".
% defaults
if nargin < 3
n = [100 100];
end
if nargin < 4
ax = [min(x), max(x), min(y), max(y)];
end
% parameters
nx = n(1);
ny = n(2);
xl = ax(1 : 2);
yl = ax(3 : 4);
% generate histogram
i = floor((x - xl(1)) / diff(xl) * nx) + 1;
i(i < 1) = 1;
i(i > nx) = nx;
j = floor((y - yl(1)) / diff(yl) * ny) + 1;
j(j < 1) = 1;
j(j > ny) = ny;
H = sparse(i, j, ones(size(i)), nx, ny);
% generate axes
xs = (0.5 : nx) / nx * diff(xl) + xl(1);
ys = (0.5 : ny) / ny * diff(yl) + yl(1);
% possibly plot
if nargout == 0
imagesc(ys, xs, H')
axis xy
clear H xs ys
end

I am trying to understand why the dimensions of this calculation are wrong?

I am solving the poisson equation and want to plot the error of the exact solution vs. number of grid points. my code is:
function [Ntot,err] = poisson(N)
nx = N; % Number of steps in space(x)
ny = N; % Number of steps in space(y)
Ntot = nx*ny;
niter = 1000; % Number of iterations
dx = 2/(nx-1); % Width of space step(x)
dy = 2/(ny-1); % Width of space step(y)
x = -1:dx:1; % Range of x(-1,1)
y = -1:dy:1; % Range of y(-1,1)
b = zeros(nx,ny);
dn = zeros(nx,ny);
% Initial Conditions
d = zeros(nx,ny);
u = zeros(nx,ny);
% Boundary conditions
d(:,1) = 0;
d(:,ny) = 0;
d(1,:) = 0;
d(nx,:) = 0;
% Source term
b(round(ny/4),round(nx/4)) = 3000;
b(round(ny*3/4),round(nx*3/4)) = -3000;
i = 2:nx-1;
j = 2:ny-1;
% 5-point difference (Explicit)
for it = 1:niter
dn = d;
d(i,j) = ((dy^2*(dn(i + 1,j) + dn(i - 1,j))) + (dx^2*(dn(i,j + 1) + dn(i,j - 1))) - (b(i,j)*dx^2*dy*2))/(2*(dx^2 + dy^2));
u(i,j) = 2*pi*pi*sin(pi*i).*sin(pi*j);
% Boundary conditions
d(:,1) = 0;
d(:,ny) = 0;
d(1,:) = 0;
d(nx,:) = 0;
end
%
%
% err = abs(u - d);
the error I get is:
Subscripted assignment dimension mismatch.
Error in poisson (line 39)
u(i,j) = 2*pi*pi*sin(pi*i).*sin(pi*j);
I am not sure why it is not calculating u at every grid point. I tried taking it out of the for loop but that did not help. Any ideas would be appreciated.
This is because i and j are both 1-by-(N-2) vectors, so u(i, j) is an (N-2)-by-(N-2) matrix. However, the expression 2*pi*pi*sin(pi*i).*sin(pi*j) is a 1-by-(N-2) vector.
The dimensions obviously don't match, hence the error.
I'm not sure, but I'm guessing that you meant to do the following:
u(i,j) = 2 * pi * pi * bsxfun(#times, sin(pi * i), sin(pi * j)');
Alternatively, you can use basic matrix multiplication to produce an (N-2)-by-(N-2) like so:
u(i, j) = 2 * pi * pi * sin(pi * i') * sin(pi * j); %// Note the transpose
P.S: it is recommended not to use "i" and "j" as names for variables.