Firstly, I'm quite new to Matlab.
I am currently trying to do a definite integral with respect to y of a particular function. The function that I want to integrate is
(note that the big parenthesis is multiplying with the first factor - I can't get the latex to not make it look like power)
I have tried plugging the above integral into Desmos and it worked as intended. My plan was to vary the value of x and y and will be using for loop via matlab.
However, after trying to use the int function to calculate the definite integral with the code as follow:
h = 5;
a = 2;
syms y
x = 3.8;
p = 2.*x.^2+2.*a.*y;
q = x.^2+y.^2;
r = x.^2+a.^2;
f = (-1./sqrt(1-(p.^2./(4.*q.*r)))).*(2.*sqrt(q).*sqrt(r).*2.*a-p.*2.*y.*sqrt(r)./sqrt(q))./(4.*q.*r);
theta = int(f,y,a+0.01,h) %the integral is undefined at y=2, hence the +0.01
the result is not quite as expected
theta =
int(-((8*461^(1/2)*(y^2 + 361/25)^(1/2))/5 - (461^(1/2)*y*(8*y + 1444/25))/(5*(y^2 + 361/25)^(1/2)))/((1 - (4*y + 722/25)^2/((1844*y^2)/25 + 665684/625))^(1/2)*((1844*y^2)/25 + 665684/625)), y, 21/10, 5)
After browsing through various posts, the common mistake is the undefined interval but the +0.01 should have fixed it. Any guidance on what went wrong is much appreciated.
The Definite Integrals example in the docs shows exactly this type of output when a closed form cannot be computed. You can approximate it numerically using vpa, i.e.
F = int(f,y,a,h);
theta = vpa(F);
Or you can do a numerical computation directly
theta = vpaintegral(f,y,a,h);
From the docs:
The vpaintegral function is faster and provides control over integration tolerances.
Related
Finding m and c for an equation y = mx + c, with the help of math and plots.
y is data_model_1, x is time.
Avoid other MATLAB functions like fitlm as it defeats the purpose.
I am having trouble finding the constants m and c. I am trying to find both m and c by limiting them to a range (based on smart guess) and I need to deduce the m and c values based on the mean error range. The point where mean error range is closest to 0 should be my m and c values.
load(file)
figure
plot(time,data_model_1,'bo')
hold on
for a = 0.11:0.01:0.13
c = -13:0.1:-10
data_a = a * time + c ;
plot(time,data_a,'r');
end
figure
hold on
for a = 0.11:0.01:0.13
c = -13:0.1:-10
data_a = a * time + c ;
mean_range = mean(abs(data_a - data_model_1));
plot(a,mean_range,'b.')
end
A quick & dirty approach
You can quickly get m and c using fminsearch(). In the first example below, the error function is the sum of squared error (SSE). The second example uses the sum of absolute error. The key here is ensuring the error function is convex.
Note that c = Beta(1) and m = Beta(2).
Reproducible example (MATLAB code[1]):
% Generate some example data
N = 50;
X = 2 + 13*random(makedist('Beta',.7,.8),N,1);
Y = 5 + 1.5.*X + randn(N,1);
% Example 1
SSEh =#(Beta) sum((Y - (Beta(1) + (Beta(2).*X))).^2);
Beta0 = [0.5 0.5]; % Initial Guess
[Beta SSE] = fminsearch(SSEh,Beta0)
% Example 2
SAEh =#(Beta) sum(abs(Y-(Beta(1) + Beta(2).*X)));
[Beta SumAbsErr] = fminsearch(SAEh,Beta0)
This is a quick & dirty approach that can work for many applications.
#Wolfie's comment directs you to the analytical approach to solve a system of linear equations with the \ operator or mldivide(). This is the more correct approach (though it will get a similar answer). One caveat is this approach gets the SSE answer.
[1] Tested with MATLAB R2018a
I would like to use fminsearch in order to find the local maximum of a function.
Is it possible to find local maximum using fminsearch with "just" searching on the negative return value of the function.
for example:
function f = myfun(x,a)
f = x(1)^2 + a*x(2)^2;
a = 1.5;
x = fminsearch(#(x) -1 * myfun(x,a),[0,1]);
Is it possible?
Update1: In order to elaborate my question and making it clearer (following some comments below) - I'm adding this update:
By asking if it's possible to do so, I meant is it a proper use of fminsearch function - is it the intended use to find max using fminsearch?
Update2: for who ever concern with the same question - In addition to the correct answer below , here is the documentation from https://www.mathworks.com/help/matlab/math/optimizing-nonlinear-functions.html#bsgpq6p-10
Maximizing Functions
The fminbnd and fminsearch solvers attempt to minimize an objective function. If you have a maximization problem, that is, a problem of the form
max x f(x), then define g(x) = –f(x), and minimize g.
For example, to find the maximum of tan(cos(x)) near x = 5, evaluate:
[x fval] = fminbnd(#(x)-tan(cos(x)),3,8)
x = 6.2832
fval = -1.5574
The maximum is 1.5574 (the negative of the reported
fval), and occurs at x = 6.2832. This answer is correct since, to five
digits, the maximum is tan(1) = 1.5574, which occurs at x = 2π =
6.2832.
Yes you can, that's also why there is no fmaxsearch function:
For example:
func = #(x) sin(x);
sol = fminsearch(#(x) func(x),0)
% sol = pi/2
sol = fminsearch(#(x) func(x)*-1,0)
% sol = -pi/2
I have an equation of the form c = integral of f(t)dt limiting from a constant to a variable (I don't want to show the full equation because it is very long and complex). Is there any way to calculate in MATLAB what the value of that variable is (there are no other variables and the equation is too difficult to solve by hand)?
Assume your limit is from cons to t and g(t) as your function with variable t. Now,
syms t
f(t) = int(g(t),t);
This will give you the indefinite integral. Now f(t) will be
f(t) = f(t)+f(cons);
You have the value of f(t)=c. So just solve the equation
S = solve(f(t)==c,t,'Real',true);
eval(S) will give the answer i think
This is an extremely unclear question - if you do not want to post the full equation, post an example instead
I am assuming this is what you intend: you have an integrand f(x), which you know, and has been integrated to give some constant c which you know, over the limits of x = 0, to x = y, for example, where y may change, and you desire to find y
My advice would be to integrate f(x) manually, fill in the first limit, and subtract that portion from c. Next you could employ some technique such as the Newton-Ralphson method to iteratively search for the root to your equation, which should be in x only
You could use a function handle and the quad function for the integral
myFunc = #(t) exp(t*3); % or whatever
t0 = 0;
t1 = 3;
L = 50;
f = #(b) quad(#(t) myFunc(t,b),t0,t1);
bsolve = fzero(f,2);
Hope it help !
The problem in the link:
can be integrated analytically and the answer is 4, however I'm interested in integrating it numerically using Matlab, because it's similar in form to a problem that I can't integrate analytically. The difficulty in the numerical integration arises because the function in the two inner integrals is a function of x,y and z and z can't be factored out.
by no means, this is elegant. hope someone can make better use of matlab functions than me. i have tried the brute force way just to practice numerical integration. i have tried to avoid the pole in the inner integral at z=0 by exploiting the fact that it is also being multiplied by z. i get 3.9993. someone must get better solution by using something better than trapezoidal rule
function []=sofn
clear all
global x y z xx yy zz dx dy
dx=0.05;
x=0:dx:1;
dy=0.002;
dz=0.002;
y=0:dy:1;
z=0:dz:2;
xx=length(x);
yy=length(y);
zz=length(z);
s1=0;
for i=1:zz-1
s1=s1+0.5*dz*(z(i+1)*exp(inte1(z(i+1)))+z(i)*exp(inte1(z(i))));
end
s1
end
function s2=inte1(localz)
global y yy dy
if localz==0
s2=0;
else
s2=0;
for j=1:yy-1
s2=s2+0.5*dy*(inte2(y(j),localz)+inte2(y(j+1),localz));
end
end
end
function s3=inte2(localy,localz)
global x xx dx
s3=0;
for k=1:xx-1
s3=s3+0.5*dx*(2/(localy+localz));
end
end
Well, this is strange, because on the poster's similar previous question I claimed this can't be done, and now after having looked at Guddu's answer I realize its not that complicated. What I wrote before, that a numerical integration results in a number but not a function, is true – but beside the point: One can just define a function that evaluates the integral for every given parameter, and this way effectively one does have a function as a result of a numerical integration.
Anyways, here it goes:
function q = outer
f = #(z) (z .* exp(inner(z)));
q = quad(f, eps, 2);
end
function qs = inner(zs)
% compute \int_0^1 1 / (y + z) dy for given z
qs = nan(size(zs));
for i = 1 : numel(zs)
z = zs(i);
f = #(y) (1 ./ (y + z));
qs(i) = quad(f, 0 , 1);
end
end
I applied the simplification suggested by myself in a comment, eliminating x. The function inner calculates the value of the inner integral over y as a function of z. Then the function outer computes the outer integral over z. I avoid the pole at z = 0 by letting the integration run from eps instead of 0. The result is
4.00000013663955
inner has to be implemented using a for loop because a function given to quad needs to be able to return its value simultaneously for several argument values.
We have an equation similar to the Fredholm integral equation of second kind.
To solve this equation we have been given an iterative solution that is guaranteed to converge for our specific equation. Now our only problem consists in implementing this iterative prodedure in MATLAB.
For now, the problematic part of our code looks like this:
function delta = delta(x,a,P,H,E,c,c0,w)
delt = #(x)delta_a(x,a,P,H,E,c0,w);
for i=1:500
delt = #(x)delt(x) - 1/E.*integral(#(xi)((c(1)-c(2)*delt(xi))*ms(xi,x,a,P,H,w)),0,a-0.001);
end
delta=delt;
end
delta_a is a function of x, and represent the initial value of the iteration. ms is a function of x and xi.
As you might see we want delt to depend on both x (before the integral) and xi (inside of the integral) in the iteration. Unfortunately this way of writing the code (with the function handle) does not give us a numerical value, as we wish. We can't either write delt as two different functions, one of x and one of xi, since xi is not defined (until integral defines it). So, how can we make sure that delt depends on xi inside of the integral, and still get a numerical value out of the iteration?
Do any of you have any suggestions to how we might solve this?
Using numerical integration
Explanation of the input parameters: x is a vector of numerical values, all the rest are constants. A problem with my code is that the input parameter x is not being used (I guess this means that x is being treated as a symbol).
It looks like you can do a nesting of anonymous functions in MATLAB:
f =
#(x)2*x
>> ff = #(x) f(f(x))
ff =
#(x)f(f(x))
>> ff(2)
ans =
8
>> f = ff;
>> f(2)
ans =
8
Also it is possible to rebind the pointers to the functions.
Thus, you can set up your iteration like
delta_old = #(x) delta_a(x)
for i=1:500
delta_new = #(x) delta_old(x) - integral(#(xi),delta_old(xi))
delta_old = delta_new
end
plus the inclusion of your parameters...
You may want to consider to solve a discretized version of your problem.
Let K be the matrix which discretizes your Fredholm kernel k(t,s), e.g.
K(i,j) = int_a^b K(x_i, s) l_j(s) ds
where l_j(s) is, for instance, the j-th lagrange interpolant associated to the interpolation nodes (x_i) = x_1,x_2,...,x_n.
Then, solving your Picard iterations is as simple as doing
phi_n+1 = f + K*phi_n
i.e.
for i = 1:N
phi = f + K*phi
end
where phi_n and f are the nodal values of phi and f on the (x_i).