In post processing of the simulation results in which helicity density is already computed, I am required to measure the angle between velocity vector and vorticity vector. Helicity is nothing but the scalar product of velocity and vorticity. Can someone please provide some insights of how this can be done in Paraview ?
Filters -> Calculator
vel_x*vort_x + vel_y*vort_y + vel_z*vort_z
Apply.
Related
I have x,y,z data for birds flying.
5.41634053198718 -18.1810946096409 -0.780385429905346
5.35578033638605 -18.1270442655634 -0.776694225482939
5.28687303433952 -18.0715127366784 -0.771968693273565
5.22280640780212 -18.0183932558829 -0.754602789629705
5.15964035792608 -17.9643849978555 -0.745350176350257
5.09014224340910 -17.8968959680244 -0.731112510479869
5.02017144713341 -17.8157826681313 -0.716412745992774
4.94927907542683 -17.7428283683055 -0.705797975911837
4.88058887728044 -17.6828866166493 -0.695765115125014
4.81567941240209 -17.6178084266463 -0.687394977780229
I want to know the kinematic properties of the flight trajectory. Currently, I have tried using smoothing with Matlab spaps function to generate a quintic spline, as is often been done in the literature. I use the spline to generate 1st and 2nd derivatives (velocity and acceleration). This yields the following:
Velocity (m/s)
7.53445215021684
8.69441552364295
8.81064845682925
8.18234102569862
8.90947412371613
10.6002874957899
10.6624464789766
9.82686835741751
8.47284851350541
11.3409318153158
Linear Acceleration (m/s^2)
183.838635562134
102.230396070086
217.935743093510
166.277761581847
195.859134993080
177.605911374232
133.877969039041
111.044847076448
83.5303968061012
691.158834476335
Velocity seems like realistic values, but I do not have experience with calculating acceleration and these values seem wildly high. I even tried just using the equations for velocity and acceleration (time between positions is 0.01 because data were sampled at 100 fps). Papers of other flying animals do not seem to have accelerations this high but I can't figure out where I am going wrong. Can anyone shed some light here? Am I just going about this incorrectly? How can I verify my answers?
If you look for example at the first two elements of your velocity array, they differ by 1.159963373426111m/s in 0.01s, so it is kind of consistent with accelerations of the order of hundreds of m/s^2. Whether this is possible or not for your flying animals I can't tell.
On the other hand, keep in mind that velocities and accelerations are always vector quantities, while I guess you're just looking at the magnitude?
What is the fitness function used to solve an inverted pendulum ?
I am evolving neural networks with genetic algorithm. And I don't know how to evaluate each individual.
I tried minimize the angle of pendulum and maximize distance traveled at the end of evaluation time (10 s), but this won't work.
inputs for neural network are: cart velocity, cart position, pendulum angular velocity and pendulum angle at time (t). The output is the force applied at time (t+1)
thanks in advance.
I found this paper which lists their objective function as being:
Defined as:
where "Xmax = 1.0, thetaMax = pi/6, _X'max = 1.0, theta'Max =
3.0, N is the number of iteration steps, T = 0.02 * TS and Wk are selected positive weights." (Using specific values for angles, velocities, and positions from the paper, however, you will want to use your own values depending on the boundary conditions of your pendulum).
The paper also states "The first and second terms determine the accumulated sum of
normalised absolute deviations of X1 and X3 from zero and the third term when minimised, maximises the survival time."
That should be more than enough to get started with, but i HIGHLY recommend you read the whole paper. Its a great read and i found it quite educational.
You can make your own fitness function, but i think the idea of using a position, velocity, angle, and the rate of change of the angle the pendulum is a good idea for the fitness function. You can, however, choose to use those variables in very different ways than the way the author of the paper chose to model their function.
It wouldn't hurt to read up on harmonic oscillators either. They take the general form:
mx" + Bx' -kx = Acos(w*t)
(where B, or A may be 0 depending on whether or not the oscillator is damped/undamped or driven/undriven respectively).
I'm calculating displacement from the motion of an accelerometer and using a Kalman filter to improve the displacement accuracy. Please note that I am aware of ineffectiveness of using acceleration to obtain displacement in real scenarios, but in my case displacement is pretty small (like 10 cm over 2–3 seconds).
I am following this paper (PDF). In the paper there are two matrices, Q and R, for noise modeling and they are set such that displacement error is minimized. The authors tested the above with synthetic acceleration data of a known covariance to use the same in matrices Q and R.
I decided to vary the particular covariance and find its corresponding minimum error in displacement. But in my case there is no change in displacement at any value of covariance. Any help?
I finished an SVM training and got data like X, Y. X is the feature matrix only with 2 dimensions, and Y is the classification labels. Because the data is only in two dimensions, so I would like to draw a decision boundary to show the surface of support vectors.
I use contouf in Matlab to do the trick, but really find it hard to understand how to use the function.
I wrote like:
#1 try:
contourf(X);
#2 try:
contourf([X(:,1) X(:,2) Y]);
#3 try:
Z(:,:,1)=X(Y==1,:);
Z(:,:,2)=X(Y==2,:);
contourf(Z);
all these things do not correctly. And I checked the Matlab help files, most of them make Z as a function, so I really do not know how to form the correct Z matrix.
If you're using the svmtrain and svmclassify commands from Bioinformatics Toolbox, you can just use the additional input argument (...'showplot', true), and it will display a scatter plot with a decision boundary and the support vectors highlighted.
If you're using your own SVM, or a third-party tool such as libSVM, what you probably need to do is to:
Create a grid of points in your 2D input feature space using the meshgrid command
Classify those points using your trained SVM
Plot the grid of points and the classifications using contourf.
For example, in kind-of-MATLAB-but-pseudocode, assuming your input features are called X1 and X2:
numPtsInGrid = 100;
x1Range = linspace(x1lower, x1upper, numPtsInGrid);
x2Range = linspace(x2lower, x2upper, numPtsInGrid);
[X1, X2] = meshgrid(x1Range, x2Range);
Z = classifyWithMySVMSomehow([X1(:), X2(:)]);
contourf(X1(:), X2(:), Z(:))
Hope that helps.
I know it's been a while but I will give it a try in case someone else will come up with that issue.
Assume we have a 2D training set so as to train an SVM model, in other words the feature space is a 2D space. We know that a kernel SVM model leads to a score (or decision) function of the form:
f(x) = sumi=1 to N(aiyik(x,xi)) + b
Where N is the number of support vectors, xi is the i -th support vector, ai is the estimated Lagrange multiplier and yi the associated class label. Values(scores) of decision function in way depict the distance of the observation x frοm the decision boundary.
Now assume that for every point (X,Y) in the 2D feature space we can find the corresponding score of the decision function. We can plot the results in the 3D euclidean space, where X corresponds to values of first feature vector f1, Y to values of second feature f2, and Z to the the return of decision function for every point (X,Y). The intersection of this 3D figure with the Z=0 plane gives us the decision boundary into the two-dimensional feature space. In other words, imagine that the decision boundary is formed by the (X,Y) points that have scores equal to 0. Seems logical right?
Now in MATLAB you can easily do that, by first creating a grid in X,Y space:
d = 0.02;
[x1Grid,x2Grid] = meshgrid(minimum_X:d:maximum_X,minimum_Y:d:maximum_Y);
d is selected according to the desired resolution of the grid.
Then for a trained model SVMModel find the scores of every grid's point:
xGrid = [x1Grid(:),x2Grid(:)];
[~,scores] = predict(SVMModel,xGrid);
Finally plot the decision boundary
figure;
contour(x1Grid,x2Grid,reshape(scores(:,2),size(x1Grid)),[0 0],'k');
Contour gives us a 2D graph where information about the 3rd dimension is depicted as solid lines in the 2D plane. These lines implie iso-response values, in other words (X,Y) points with same Z value. In our occasion contour gives us the decision boundary.
Hope I helped to make all that more clear. You can find very useful information and examples in the following links:
MATLAB's example
Representation of decision function in 3D space
I am trying to program a 3 body problem using matlab. I was given the formula for the moon's trajectory in its rotational frame in space. It's basically the ydotdot, xdotdot=GM/(x^2+y^2)^3/2 formula. What the formula is, is not that important.
THe problem I am facing is that, I am supposed to code up a program that will numerically solve the moon's trajectory equation. I'm using ODE45 to compare with since my goal is to get the same results as ODE45. My ultimate problem is that, I want to iterate through time in terms of days so tspan= [0 365]. The thins is when I convert Gravitational constant to seconds and then do tspace= [0 365] I get a completely different result then If I were to do [0 365*3600*34] representing the seconds in a year and G= 6.67e-11. It seems that my units are very weird.
I was wondering if anyone can explain why this is happening when I use ODE 45. Why can't I convert seconds to days clearly using ODE45? Is there an extra step I have to do? The only other variables in my problem is radius, distance, and the mass of the 3 bodies.
Thank you so much. I've been working on this for a very very long time. Any help would be much appreciated.
That formula for gravitational acceleration along each axis isn't correct.
Put the earth, with mass M_e, at the origin, with the moon (mass M_m) at (x,y). Then
the earth-moon distance is given by:
R_em = sqrt(x^2 + y^2)
The total earth-moon force is given by:
F_em = G*M_e*M_m/R_em^2
The total acceleration due to Earth's gravity is given by:
a_em = F_em/M_m = G*M_e/R_em^2
and is directed toward the origin. The acceleration along
each axis is then:
xdotdot = -F_em*cos(theta) = -F_em*x/R_em = -G*M_e*x/R_em^(3/2)
ydotdot = -F_em*sin(theta) = -F_em*y/R_em = -G*M_e*y/R_em^(3/2)
Note the x and y factors, which are missing from the formula you stated.
I'm not sure what you mean by "converting the gravitational constant to seconds".
The value you're using for G has units of newton-meter^2/kg^2. So it's already
expressed in the MKS (meter-kilogram-second) system, and the accelerations calculated
using this value will have units of meters/sec^2.
With a third body (say, the sun) at (x_s, y_s), you compute a new R_s representing
the moon-sun distance, and compute new acceleration vectors as above, using the
sun's mass M_s (except the acceleration is now in the direction of (x_s, y_s), rather than (0,0)). The accelerations of the moon from the gravity of the earth and the sun just add component-wise, once everything is put into a common coordinate system (here,
geocentric coordinates -- although heliocentric might be a more convenient choice, if you're simulating the sun-earth-moon system). That, plus the initial positions and velocities, should be all you need to compute the positions and velocities at the next time step.