I am trying to optimize the following program by using for loops
t = 0:0.1:100;
conc = rand(size(t));
syms x
equ_1(x) = 10*x.^2+1;
equ_2(x) = 5*x.^3+10*x.^2;
equ_3(x) = 5*x.^3+10*x.^2;
y_1 = equ_1(conc);
y_2 = equ_2(conc);
y_3 = equ_3(conc);
p_1 = polyfit(t,y_1,1);
p_2 = polyfit(t,y_2,1);
p_3 = polyfit(t,y_3,1);
yfit_1 = p_1(1)*conc+p_1(2);
yfit_2 = p_2(1)*conc+p_2(2);
yfit_3 = p_2(1)*conc+p_2(2);
rms_er_1 = double(sqrt((sum((yfit_1-y_1).^2)./length(yfit_1))));
rms_er_2 = double(sqrt((sum((yfit_2-y_2).^2)./length(yfit_2))));
rms_er_3 = double(sqrt((sum((yfit_3-y_3).^2)./length(yfit_3))));
rms = [rms_er_1 rms_er_2 rms_er_3]
In this program. I have many equations and I can write them manually like equ_1(x),equ_1(x),equ_1(x) etc. After writing equations, will it be possible to write remaining programs by using for loops?
Can anyone help?
Yes, it is possible. You can pack your functions in a cell array and give your values as parameters while looping over this cell array
t = (0:0.1:100)';
conc = rand(size(t));
% Packing your function handles in a cell array ( I do not have the
% symbolic math toolbox, so I used function handles here. In your case you
% have to pack your equations equ_n(x) in between the curly brackets{} )
allfuns = {#(x) 10*x.^2+1, ...
#(x) 5*x.^3+10*x.^2, ...
#(x) 5*x.^3+10*x.^2};
% Allocate memory
y = zeros(length(t), length(allfuns));
p = zeros(2,length(allfuns));
yfit = zeros(length(t), length(allfuns));
rms = zeros(1, length(allfuns));
% Loop over all functions the cell, applying your functional chain
for i=1:length(allfuns)
y(:,i) = allfuns{i}(t);
p(:,i) = polyfit(t,y(:,i),1);
yfit(:,i) = p(1,i)*conc+p(2,i);
rms(:,i) = double(sqrt((sum((yfit(:,i)-y(:,i)).^2)./ ...
length(yfit(:,i)))));
end
This leads to
>> rms
rms =
1.0e+06 *
0.0578 2.6999 2.6999
You can expand that to an arbitrary number of equations in allfuns.
Btw: You are fitting 1st order polynomials with polyfit to values calculated with 2nd and 3rd order functions. This leads of course to rough fits with high rms. I do not know how your complete problem looks like, but you could define an array poly_orders containing the polynomial order of each function in allfuns. If you give those values as parameter to the polyfit function in the loop, your fits will work way better.
You can try cellfun
Here is an example.
Define in a .m
function y = your_complex_operation(f,x, t)
y_1 = f(x);
p_1 = polyfit(t,y_1,1);
yfit_1 = p_1(1)*x+p_1(2);
y = double(sqrt((sum((yfit_1-y_1).^2)./length(yfit_1))));
end
Then use cellfunc
funs{1}=#(x) 10*x.^2+1;
funs{2}=#(x) 5*x.^3+10*x.^2;
funs{3}=#(x) 5*x.^3+10*x.^2;
%as many as you need
t = 0:0.1:100;
conc = rand(size(t));
funs_res = cellfun(#(c) your_complex_operation(c,conc,t),funs);
Related
I'm trying to avoid the function tf() from Matlab since it requires specific toolboxes to run.
The transfer function that I'm using is quite simple. Is the model for a heatsink temperature.
H(s) = (Rth/Tau)/(s + 1/Tau)
In order to avoid the tf() function, I've tried to substitute the transfer function with a state space model coded in Matlab.
I've used the function ss() to get te values of A,B,C and D. And I've tried to compare the results from tf() and my function.
Here's the code that I've used:
Rth = 8.3220e-04; % ºC/W
Tau = 0.0025; % s
P = rand(1,10)*1000; % Losses = input
t = 0:1:length(P)-1; % Time array
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%% Transfer function %%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
H = tf([0 Rth/Tau],[1 1/Tau]);
Transfer_func = lsim(H,P,t);
figure, plot(Transfer_func),grid on,grid minor, title('Transfer func')
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%% My función ss %%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% Preallocate for speed
x(1:length(P)) = 0;
y(1:length(P)) = 0;
u = P;
sys = ss(H);
A = sys.A;
B = sys.B;
C = sys.C;
D = sys.D;
for k = 1:length(u)
x(k+1) = A*x(k) + B*u(k);
y(k) = C*x(k) + D*u(k);
end
figure, plot(y), grid on,grid minor, title('With my función')
I know that the values from A,B,C and D are ok, since I've checked them using
H = tf([0 Rth/Tau],[1 1/Tau]);
sys = ss(H);
state_space_sys = ss(sys.A,sys.B,sys.C,sys.D);
state_space = lsim(state_space_sys,P,t);
figure, plot(state_space),grid on,grid minor, title('State space')
As you can see, the results obtained from my funtion and the function tf() are very different.
Is there any mistakes on the approach?
If it's not possible to avoid the tf() function in this way, is there any other way?
At the end, I found another solution. I'm posting this here, so if someone has the same problem, can use this approach.
If you take the transfer function, and develop it, we reach to the following expresion
H(s) = deltaT(s)/P(s) = (Rth/Tau)/(s + 1/Tau)
deltaT(s) * (s + 1/Tau) = (Rth/Tau) * P(s)
deltaT(s) * s = (Rth/Tau) * P(s) - deltaT(s)/Tau
Now, we know that 1/s is equal to integrate. So in the end, we have to integrate the right side of the equation. The code would be like this.
Cth = Tau/Rth;
deltaT = zeros(size(P));
for i = 2:length(P)
deltaT(i) = (1/Cth * (P(i)-deltaT(i-1)/Rth))*(time(i)-time(i-1)) + deltaT(i-1);
end
This integral has the same output as the function tf().
This is a part of my code in Matlab. I tried to make it parallel but there is an error:
The variable gax in a parfor cannot be classified.
I know why the error occurs. because I should tell Matlab that v is an incresing vector which doesn't contain repeated elements. Could anyone help me to use this information to parallelize the code?
v=[1,3,6,8];
ggx=5.*ones(15,14);
gax=ones(15,14);
for m=v
if m > 1
parfor j=1:m-1
gax(j,m-1) = ggx(j,m-1);
end
end
if m<nn
parfor jo=m+1:15
gax(jo,m) = ggx(jo,m);
end
end
end
Optimizing a code should be closely related to its purpose, especially when you use parfor. The code you wrote in the question can be written in a much more efficient way, and definitely, do not need to be parallelized.
However, I understand that you tried to simplify the problem, just to get the idea of how to slice your variables, so here is a fixed version the can run with parfor. But this is surely not the way to write this code:
v = [1,3,6,8];
ggx = 5.*ones(15,14);
gax = ones(15,14);
nn = 5;
for m = v
if m > 1
temp_end = m-1;
temp = ggx(:,temp_end);
parfor ja = 1:temp_end
gax(ja,temp_end) = temp(ja);
end
end
if m < nn
temp = ggx(:,m);
parfor jo = m+1:15
gax(jo,m) = temp(jo);
end
end
end
A vectorized implementation will look like this:
v = [1,3,6,8];
ggx = 5.*ones(15,14);
gax = ones(15,14);
nn = 5;
m1 = v>1; % first condition with logical indexing
temp = v(m1)-1; % get the values from v
r = ones(1,sum(temp)); % generate a vector of indicies
r(cumsum(temp)) = -temp+1; % place the reseting locations
r = cumsum(r); % calculate the indecies
r(cumsum(temp)) = temp; % place the ending points
c = repelem(temp,temp); % create an indecies vector for the columns
inds1 = sub2ind(size(gax),r,c); % convert the indecies to linear
mnn = v<nn; % second condition with logical indexing
temp = v(mnn)+1; % get the values from v
r_max = size(gax,1); % get the height of gax
r_count = r_max-temp+1; % calculate no. of rows per value in v
r = ones(1,sum(r_count)); % generate a vector of indicies
r([1 r_count(1:end-1)+1]) = temp; % set the t indicies
r(cumsum(r_count)+1) = -(r_count-temp)+1; % place the reseting locations
r = cumsum(r(1:end-1)); % calculate the indecies
c = repelem(temp-1,r_count); % create an indecies vector for the columns
inds2 = sub2ind(size(gax),r,c); % convert the indecies to linear
gax([inds1 inds2]) = ggx([inds1 inds2]); % assgin the relevant values
This is indeed quite complicated, and not always necessary. A good thing to remember, though, is that nested for loop are much slower than a single loop, so in some cases (depend on the size of the output), this will may be the fastest solution:
for m = v
if m > 1
gax(1:m-1,m-1) = ggx(1:m-1,m-1);
end
if m<nn
gax(m+1:15,m) = ggx(m+1:15,m);
end
end
At first I create a script giving the name multi_002
After I create the function that includes the equation
The script calls the function and reads the array 'a'.
Each array include one equation a(i) = x - i
I want to minimize its equation of the 4 lines array 'a'.
I suspect that something doesn't work right. I notice that
Optimtool works but f1,f2,f3,f4 doesn't go to zero. With another words
there isn't convergence.
FitnessFunction = #array_002;
numberOfVariables = 1;
[x,fval] = gamultiobj(FitnessFunction,numberOfVariables);
function [a,y,c]= array_002(x)
size = 4; n = 4;
y = zeros(size,1);
c = zeros(size,1);
for i = 1:n
y(i) = x;
c(i) = i;
a = y - c;
end
Why my genetic algorithm doesn't converge? Is there any idea?
Thank you in advance!
I am trying to compute the value of this integral using Matlab
Here the other parameters have been defined or computed in the earlier part of the program as follows
N = 2;
sigma = [0.01 0.1];
l = [15];
meu = 4*pi*10^(-7);
f = logspace ( 1, 6, 500);
w=2*pi.*f;
for j = 1 : length(f)
q2(j)= sqrt(sqrt(-1)*2*pi*f(j)*meu*sigma(2));
q1(j)= sqrt(sqrt(-1)*2*pi*f(j)*meu*sigma(1));
C2(j)= 1/(q2(j));
C1(j)= (q1(j)*C2(j) + tanh(q1(j)*l))/(q1(j)*(1+q1(j)*C2(j)*tanh(q1(j)*l)));
Z(j) = sqrt(-1)*2*pi*f(j)*C1(j);
Apprho(j) = meu*(1/(2*pi*f(j))*(abs(Z(j))^2));
Phi(j) = atan(imag(Z(j))/real(Z(j)));
end
%integration part
c1=w./(2*pi);
rho0=1;
fun = #(x) log(Apprho(x)/rho0)/(x.^2-w^2);
c2= integral(fun,0,Inf);
phin=pi/4-c1.*c2;
I am getting an error like this
could anyone help and tell me where i am going wrong.thanks in advance
Define Apprho in a separate *.m function file, instead of storing it in an array:
function [ result ] = Apprho(x)
%
% Calculate f and Z based on input argument x
%
% ...
%
meu = 4*pi*10^(-7);
result = meu*(1/(2*pi*f)*(abs(Z)^2));
end
How you calculate f and Z is up to you.
MATLAB's integral works by calling the function (in this case, Apprho) repeatedly at many different x values. The x values called by integral don't necessarily correspond to the 1: length(f) values used in your original code, which is why you received errors.
Can anyone help vectorize this Matlab code? The specific problem is the sum and bessel function with vector inputs.
Thank you!
N = 3;
rho_g = linspace(1e-3,1,N);
phi_g = linspace(0,2*pi,N);
n = 1:3;
tau = [1 2.*ones(1,length(n)-1)];
for ii = 1:length(rho_g)
for jj = 1:length(phi_g)
% Coordinates
rho_o = rho_g(ii);
phi_o = phi_g(jj);
% factors
fc = cos(n.*(phi_o-phi_s));
fs = sin(n.*(phi_o-phi_s));
Ez_t(ii,jj) = sum(tau.*besselj(n,k(3)*rho_s).*besselh(n,2,k(3)*rho_o).*fc);
end
end
You could try to vectorize this code, which might be possible with some bsxfun or so, but it would be hard to understand code, and it is the question if it would run any faster, since your code already uses vector math in the inner loop (even though your vectors only have length 3). The resulting code would become very difficult to read, so you or your colleague will have no idea what it does when you have a look at it in 2 years time.
Before wasting time on vectorization, it is much more important that you learn about loop invariant code motion, which is easy to apply to your code. Some observations:
you do not use fs, so remove that.
the term tau.*besselj(n,k(3)*rho_s) does not depend on any of your loop variables ii and jj, so it is constant. Calculate it once before your loop.
you should probably pre-allocate the matrix Ez_t.
the only terms that change during the loop are fc, which depends on jj, and besselh(n,2,k(3)*rho_o), which depends on ii. I guess that the latter costs much more time to calculate, so it better to not calculate this N*N times in the inner loop, but only N times in the outer loop. If the calculation based on jj would take more time, you could swap the for-loops over ii and jj, but that does not seem to be the case here.
The result code would look something like this (untested):
N = 3;
rho_g = linspace(1e-3,1,N);
phi_g = linspace(0,2*pi,N);
n = 1:3;
tau = [1 2.*ones(1,length(n)-1)];
% constant part, does not depend on ii and jj, so calculate only once!
temp1 = tau.*besselj(n,k(3)*rho_s);
Ez_t = nan(length(rho_g), length(phi_g)); % preallocate space
for ii = 1:length(rho_g)
% calculate stuff that depends on ii only
rho_o = rho_g(ii);
temp2 = besselh(n,2,k(3)*rho_o);
for jj = 1:length(phi_g)
phi_o = phi_g(jj);
fc = cos(n.*(phi_o-phi_s));
Ez_t(ii,jj) = sum(temp1.*temp2.*fc);
end
end
Initialization -
N = 3;
rho_g = linspace(1e-3,1,N);
phi_g = linspace(0,2*pi,N);
n = 1:3;
tau = [1 2.*ones(1,length(n)-1)];
Nested loops form (Copy from your code and shown here for comparison only) -
for ii = 1:length(rho_g)
for jj = 1:length(phi_g)
% Coordinates
rho_o = rho_g(ii);
phi_o = phi_g(jj);
% factors
fc = cos(n.*(phi_o-phi_s));
fs = sin(n.*(phi_o-phi_s));
Ez_t(ii,jj) = sum(tau.*besselj(n,k(3)*rho_s).*besselh(n,2,k(3)*rho_o).*fc);
end
end
Vectorized solution -
%%// Term - 1
term1 = repmat(tau.*besselj(n,k(3)*rho_s),[N*N 1]);
%%// Term - 2
[n1,rho_g1] = meshgrid(n,rho_g);
term2_intm = besselh(n1,2,k(3)*rho_g1);
term2 = transpose(reshape(repmat(transpose(term2_intm),[N 1]),N,N*N));
%%// Term -3
angle1 = repmat(bsxfun(#times,bsxfun(#minus,phi_g,phi_s')',n),[N 1]);
fc = cos(angle1);
%%// Output
Ez_t = sum(term1.*term2.*fc,2);
Ez_t = transpose(reshape(Ez_t,N,N));
Points to note about this vectorization or code simplification –
‘fs’ doesn’t change the output of the script, Ez_t, so it could be removed for now.
The output seems to be ‘Ez_t’,which requires three basic terms in the code as –
tau.*besselj(n,k(3)*rho_s), besselh(n,2,k(3)*rho_o) and fc. These are calculated separately for vectorization as terms1,2 and 3 respectively.
All these three terms appear to be of 1xN sizes. Our aim thus becomes to calculate these three terms without loops. Now, the two loops run for N times each, thus giving us a total loop count of NxN. Thus, we must have NxN times the data in each such term as compared to when these terms were inside the nested loops.
This is basically the essence of the vectorization done here, as the three terms are represented by ‘term1’,’term2’ and ‘fc’ itself.
In order to give a self-contained answer, I'll copy the original initialization
N = 3;
rho_g = linspace(1e-3,1,N);
phi_g = linspace(0,2*pi,N);
n = 1:3;
tau = [1 2.*ones(1,length(n)-1)];
and generate some missing data (k(3) and rho_s and phi_s in the dimension of n)
rho_s = rand(size(n));
phi_s = rand(size(n));
k(3) = rand(1);
then you can compute the same Ez_t with multidimensional arrays:
[RHO_G, PHI_G, N] = meshgrid(rho_g, phi_g, n);
[~, ~, TAU] = meshgrid(rho_g, phi_g, tau);
[~, ~, RHO_S] = meshgrid(rho_g, phi_g, rho_s);
[~, ~, PHI_S] = meshgrid(rho_g, phi_g, phi_s);
FC = cos(N.*(PHI_G - PHI_S));
FS = sin(N.*(PHI_G - PHI_S)); % not used
EZ_T = sum(TAU.*besselj(N, k(3)*RHO_S).*besselh(N, 2, k(3)*RHO_G).*FC, 3).';
You can check afterwards that both matrices are the same
norm(Ez_t - EZ_T)