Related
I have this task to create a script that acts similarly to normcdf on matlab.
x=linspace(-5,5,1000); %values for x
p= 1/sqrt(2*pi) * exp((-x.^2)/2); % THE PDF for the standard normal
t=cumtrapz(x,p); % the CDF for the standard normal distribution
plot(x,t); %shows the graph of the CDF
The problem is when the t values are assigned to 1:1000 instead of -5:5 in increments. I want to know how to assign the correct x values, that is -5:5,1000 to the t values output? such as when I do t(n) I get the same result as normcdf(n).
Just to clarify: the problem is I cannot simply say t(-5) and get result =1 as I would in normcdf(1) because the cumtrapz calculated values are assigned to x=1:1000 instead of -5 to 5.
Updated answer
Ok, having read your comment; here is how to do what you want:
x = linspace(-5,5,1000);
p = 1/sqrt(2*pi) * exp((-x.^2)/2);
cdf = cumtrapz(x,p);
q = 3; % Query point
disp(normcdf(q)) % For reference
[~,I] = min(abs(x-q)); % Find closest index
disp(cdf(I)) % Show the value
Sadly, there is no matlab syntax which will do this nicely in one line, but if you abstract finding the closest index into a different function, you can do this:
cdf(findClosest(x,q))
function I = findClosest(x,q)
if q>max(x) || q<min(x)
warning('q outside the range of x');
end
[~,I] = min(abs(x-q));
end
Also; if you are certain that the exact value of the query point q exists in x, you can just do
cdf(x==q);
But beware of floating point errors though. You may think that a certain range outght to contain a certain value, but little did you know it was different by a tiny roundoff erorr. You can see that in action for example here:
x1 = linspace(0,1,1000); % Range
x2 = asin(sin(x1)); % Ought to be the same thing
plot((x1-x2)/eps); grid on; % But they differ by rougly 1 unit of machine precision
Old answer
As far as I can tell, running your code does reproduce the result of normcdf(x) well... If you want to do exactly what normcdf does them use erfc.
close all; clear; clc;
x = linspace(-5,5,1000);
cdf = normcdf(x); % Result of normcdf for comparison
%% 1 Trapezoidal integration of normal pd
p = 1/sqrt(2*pi) * exp((-x.^2)/2);
cdf1 = cumtrapz(x,p);
%% 2 But error function IS the integral of the normal pd
cdf2 = (1+erf(x/sqrt(2)))/2;
%% 3 Or, even better, use the error function complement (works better for large negative x)
cdf3 = erfc(-x/sqrt(2))/2;
fprintf('1: Mean error = %.2d\n',mean(abs(cdf1-cdf)));
fprintf('2: Mean error = %.2d\n',mean(abs(cdf2-cdf)));
fprintf('3: Mean error = %.2d\n',mean(abs(cdf3-cdf)));
plot(x,cdf1,x,cdf2,x,cdf3,x,cdf,'k--');
This gives me
1: Mean error = 7.83e-07
2: Mean error = 1.41e-17
3: Mean error = 00 <- Because that is literally what normcdf is doing
If your goal is not not to use predefined matlab funcitons, but instead to calculate the result numerically (i.e. calculate the error function) then it's an interesting challange which you can read about for example here or in this stats stackexchange post. Just as an example, the following piece of code calculates the error function by implementing eq. 2 form the first link:
nerf = #(x,n) (-1)^n*2/sqrt(pi)*x.^(2*n+1)./factorial(n)/(2*n+1);
figure(1); hold on;
temp = zeros(size(x)); p =[];
for n = 0:20
temp = temp + nerf(x/sqrt(2),n);
if~mod(n,3)
p(end+1) = plot(x,(1+temp)/2);
end
end
ylim([-1,2]);
title('\Sigma_{n=0}^{inf} ( 2/sqrt(pi) ) \times ( (-1)^n x^{2*n+1} ) \div ( n! (2*n+1) )');
p(end+1) = plot(x,cdf,'k--');
legend(p,'n = 0','\Sigma_{n} 0->3','\Sigma_{n} 0->6','\Sigma_{n} 0->9',...
'\Sigma_{n} 0->12','\Sigma_{n} 0->15','\Sigma_{n} 0->18','normcdf(x)',...
'location','southeast');
grid on; box on;
xlabel('x'); ylabel('norm. cdf approximations');
Marcin's answer suggests a way to find the nearest sample point. It is easier, IMO, to interpolate. Given x and t as defined in the question,
interp1(x,t,n)
returns the estimated value of the CDF at x==n, for whatever value of n. But note that, for values outside the computed range, it will extrapolate and produce unreliable values.
You can define an anonymous function that works like normcdf:
my_normcdf = #(n)interp1(x,t,n);
my_normcdf(-5)
Try replacing x with 0.01 when you call cumtrapz. You can either use a vector or a scalar spacing for cumtrapz (https://www.mathworks.com/help/matlab/ref/cumtrapz.html), and this might solve your problem. Also, have you checked the original x-values? Is the problem with linspace (i.e. you are not getting the correct x vector), or with cumtrapz?
I need help finding an integral of a function using trapezoidal sums.
The program should take successive trapezoidal sums with n = 1, 2, 3, ...
subintervals until there are two neighouring values of n that differ by less than a given tolerance. I want at least one FOR loop within a WHILE loop and I don't want to use the trapz function. The program takes four inputs:
f: A function handle for a function of x.
a: A real number.
b: A real number larger than a.
tolerance: A real number that is positive and very small
The problem I have is trying to implement the formula for trapezoidal sums which is
Δx/2[y0 + 2y1 + 2y2 + … + 2yn-1 + yn]
Here is my code, and the area I'm stuck in is the "sum" part within the FOR loop. I'm trying to sum up 2y2 + 2y3....2yn-1 since I already accounted for 2y1. I get an answer, but it isn't as accurate as it should be. For example, I get 6.071717974723753 instead of 6.101605982576467.
Thanks for any help!
function t=trapintegral(f,a,b,tol)
format compact; format long;
syms x;
oldtrap = ((b-a)/2)*(f(a)+f(b));
n = 2;
h = (b-a)/n;
newtrap = (h/2)*(f(a)+(2*f(a+h))+f(b));
while (abs(newtrap-oldtrap)>=tol)
oldtrap = newtrap;
for i=[3:n]
dx = (b-a)/n;
trapezoidsum = (dx/2)*(f(x) + (2*sum(f(a+(3:n-1))))+f(b));
newtrap = trapezoidsum;
end
end
t = newtrap;
end
The reason why this code isn't working is because there are two slight errors in your summation for the trapezoidal rule. What I am precisely referring to is this statement:
trapezoidsum = (dx/2)*(f(x) + (2*sum(f(a+(3:n-1))))+f(b));
Recall the equation for the trapezoidal integration rule:
Source: Wikipedia
For the first error, f(x) should be f(a) as you are including the starting point, and shouldn't be left as symbolic. In fact, you should simply get rid of the syms x statement as it is not useful in your script. a corresponds to x1 by consulting the above equation.
The next error is the second term. You actually need to multiply your index values (3:n-1) by dx. Also, this should actually go from (1:n-1) and I'll explain later. The equation above goes from 2 to N, but for our purposes, we are going to go from 1 to N-1 as you have your code set up like that.
Remember, in the trapezoidal rule, you are subdividing the finite interval into n pieces. The ith piece is defined as:
x_i = a + dx*i; ,
where i goes from 1 up to N-1. Note that this starts at 1 and not 3. The reason why is because the first piece is already taken into account by f(a), and we only count up to N-1 as piece N is accounted by f(b). For the equation, this goes from 2 to N and by modifying the code this way, this is precisely what we are doing in the end.
Therefore, your statement actually needs to be:
trapezoidsum = (dx/2)*(f(a) + (2*sum(f(a+dx*(1:n-1))))+f(b));
Try this and let me know if you get the right answer. FWIW, MATLAB already implements trapezoidal integration by doing trapz as #ADonda already pointed out. However, you need to properly structure what your x and y values are before you set this up. In other words, you would need to set up your dx before hand, then calculate your x points using the x_i equation that I specified above, then use these to generate your y values. You then use trapz to calculate the area. In other words:
dx = (b-a) / n;
x = a + dx*(0:n);
y = f(x);
trapezoidsum = trapz(x,y);
You can use the above code as a reference to see if you are implementing the trapezoidal rule correctly. Your implementation and using the above code should generate the same results. All you have to do is change the value of n, then run this code to generate the approximation of the area for different subdivisions underneath your curve.
Edit - August 17th, 2014
I figured out why your code isn't working. Here are the reasons why:
The for loop is unnecessary. Take a look at the for loop iteration. You have a loop going from i = [3:n] yet you don't reference the i variable at all in your loop. As such, you don't need this at all.
You are not computing successive intervals properly. What you need to do is when you compute the trapezoidal sum for the nth subinterval, you then increment this value of n, then compute the trapezoidal rule again. This value is not being incremented properly in your while loop, which is why your area is never improving.
You need to save the previous area inside the while loop, then when you compute the next area, that's when you determine whether or not the difference between the areas is less than the tolerance. We can also get rid of that code at the beginning that tries and compute the area for n = 2. That's not needed, as we can place this inside your while loop. As such, this is what your code should look like:
function t=trapintegral(f,a,b,tol)
format long; %// Got rid of format compact. Useless
%// n starts at 2 - Also removed syms x - Useless statement
n = 2;
newtrap = ((b-a)/2)*(f(a) + f(b)); %// Initialize
oldtrap = 0; %// Initialize to 0
while (abs(newtrap-oldtrap)>=tol)
oldtrap = newtrap; %//Save the old area from the previous iteration
dx = (b-a)/n; %//Compute width
%//Determine sum
trapezoidsum = (dx/2)*(f(a) + (2*sum(f(a+dx*(1:n-1))))+f(b));
newtrap = trapezoidsum; % //This is the new sum
n = n + 1; % //Go to the next value of n
end
t = newtrap;
end
By running your code, this is what I get:
trapezoidsum = trapintegral(#(x) (x+x.^2).^(1/3),1,4,0.00001)
trapezoidsum =
6.111776299189033
Caveat
Look at the way I defined your function. You must use element-by-element operations as the sum command inside the loop will be vectorized. Take a look at the ^ operations specifically. You need to prepend a dot to the operations. Once you do this, I get the right answer.
Edit #2 - August 18th, 2014
You said you want at least one for loop. This is highly inefficient, and whoever specified having one for loop in the code really doesn't know how MATLAB works. Nevertheless, you can use the for loop to accumulate the sum term. As such:
function t=trapintegral(f,a,b,tol)
format long; %// Got rid of format compact. Useless
%// n starts at 3 - Also removed syms x - Useless statement
n = 3;
%// Compute for n = 2 first, then proceed if we don't get a better
%// difference tolerance
newtrap = ((b-a)/2)*(f(a) + f(b)); %// Initialize
oldtrap = 0; %// Initialize to 0
while (abs(newtrap-oldtrap)>=tol)
oldtrap = newtrap; %//Save the old area from the previous iteration
dx = (b-a)/n; %//Compute width
%//Determine sum
%// Initialize
trapezoidsum = (dx/2)*(f(a) + f(b));
%// Accumulate sum terms
%// Note that we multiply each term by (dx/2), but because of the
%// factor of 2 for each of these terms, these cancel and we thus have dx
for n2 = 1 : n-1
trapezoidsum = trapezoidsum + dx*f(a + dx*n2);
end
newtrap = trapezoidsum; % //This is the new sum
n = n + 1; % //Go to the next value of n
end
t = newtrap;
end
Good luck!
I am new to Matlab and I have to use fixed point iteration to find the x value for the intersection between y = x and y = sqrt(10/x+4), which after graphing it, looks to be around 1.4. I'm using an initial guess of x1 = 0. This is my current Matlab code:
f = #(x)sqrt(10./(x+4));
x1 = 0;
xArray(10) = [];
for i = 1:10
x2 = f(x1);
xArray(i) = x2;
x1 = x1 + 1;
end
plot(xArray);
fprintf('%15.8e\n',xArray);
Now when I run this it seems like my x is approaching 0.8. Can anyone tell me what I am doing wrong?
Well done. You've made a decent start at this.
Lets look at the graphical solution. BTW, this is how I'd have done the graphical part:
ezplot(#(x) x,[-1 3])
hold on
ezplot(#(x) sqrt(10./(x+4)),[-1 3])
grid on
Or, I might subtract the two functions, then looking for a zero of the difference, so where it crosses the x axis.
This is what the fixed point iteration does anyway, trying to solve for x, such that
x = sqrt(10/(x+4))
So how would I change your code to fix it? First of all, I'd want to use more descriptive names for the variables. You don't get charged by the character, and making your code easier to read & follow will pay off greatly in the future for you.
There were a couple of code issues. To initialize a vector, use a form like one of these:
xArray = zeros(1,10);
xArray(1,10) = 0;
Note that if xArray was ALREADY defined because you have been working on this problem, the latter form will only zero out that single element. So the first form is best by a large margin. It affirmatively creates an array, or overwrites an existing array if it is already present in your workspace.
Finally, I like to initialize an array like this with something special, rather than zero, so we can see when an element was overwritten. NaNs are good for this.
Next, there was no need to add one to x1 in your code. Again, I'd strongly suggest using better variable names. It is also a good idea to use comments. Be liberal.
I'd suggest the idea of a convergence tolerance. You can also have an iteration counter.
f = #(x)sqrt(10./(x+4));
% starting value
xcurrent = 0;
% count the iterations, setting a maximum in maxiter, here 25
iter = 0;
maxiter = 25;
% initialize the array to store our iterations
xArray = NaN(1,maxiter);
% convergence tolerance
xtol = 1e-8;
% before we start, the error is set to be BIG. this
% just lets our while loop get through that first iteration
xerr = inf;
% the while will stop if either criterion fails
while (iter < maxiter) && (xerr > xtol)
iter = iter + 1;
xnew = f(xcurrent);
% save each iteration
xArray(iter) = xnew;
% compute the difference between successive iterations
xerr = abs(xnew - xcurrent);
xcurrent = xnew;
end
% retain only the elements of xArray that we actually generated
xArray = xArray(1:iter);
plot(xArray);
fprintf('%15.8e\n',xArray);
What was the result?
1.58113883e+00
1.33856229e+00
1.36863563e+00
1.36479692e+00
1.36528512e+00
1.36522300e+00
1.36523091e+00
1.36522990e+00
1.36523003e+00
1.36523001e+00
1.36523001e+00
For a little more accuracy to see how well we did...
format long g
xcurrent
xcurrent =
1.36523001364783
f(xcurrent)
ans =
1.36523001338436
By the way, it is a good idea to know why the loop terminated. Did it stop for insufficient iterations?
The point of my response here was NOT to do your homework, since you were close to getting it right anyway. The point is to show some considerations on how you might improve your code for future work.
There is no need to add 1 to x1. your output from each iteration is input for next iteration. So, x2 from output of f(x1) should be the new x1. The corrected code would be
for i = 1:10
x2 = f(x1);
xArray(i) = x2;
x1 = x2;
end
f(x)x^3+4*x^2-10 in [1,2] find an approximate root
My main script contains following code:
%# Grid and model parameters
nModel=50;
nModel_want=1;
nI_grid1=5;
Nth=1;
nRow.Scale1=5;
nCol.Scale1=5;
nRow.Scale2=5^2;
nCol.Scale2=5^2;
theta = 90; % degrees
a_minor = 2; % range along minor direction
a_major = 5; % range along major direction
sill = var(reshape(Deff_matrix_NthModel,nCell.Scale1,1)); % variance of the coarse data matrix of size nRow.Scale1 X nCol.Scale1
%# Covariance computation
% Scale 1
for ihRow = 1:nRow.Scale1
for ihCol = 1:nCol.Scale1
[cov.Scale1(ihRow,ihCol),heff.Scale1(ihRow,ihCol)] = general_CovModel(theta, ihCol, ihRow, a_minor, a_major, sill, 'Exp');
end
end
% Scale 2
for ihRow = 1:nRow.Scale2
for ihCol = 1:nCol.Scale2
[cov.Scale2(ihRow,ihCol),heff.Scale2(ihRow,ihCol)] = general_CovModel(theta, ihCol/(nCol.Scale2/nCol.Scale1), ihRow/(nRow.Scale2/nRow.Scale1), a_minor, a_major, sill/(nRow.Scale2*nCol.Scale2), 'Exp');
end
end
%# Scale-up of fine scale values by averaging
[covAvg.Scale2,var_covAvg.Scale2,varNorm_covAvg.Scale2] = general_AverageProperty(nRow.Scale2/nRow.Scale1,nCol.Scale2/nCol.Scale1,1,nRow.Scale1,nCol.Scale1,1,cov.Scale2,1);
I am using two functions, general_CovModel() and general_AverageProperty(), in my main script which are given as following:
function [cov,h_eff] = general_CovModel(theta, hx, hy, a_minor, a_major, sill, mod_type)
% mod_type should be in strings
angle_rad = theta*(pi/180); % theta in degrees, angle_rad in radians
R_theta = [sin(angle_rad) cos(angle_rad); -cos(angle_rad) sin(angle_rad)];
h = [hx; hy];
lambda = a_minor/a_major;
D_lambda = [lambda 0; 0 1];
h_2prime = D_lambda*R_theta*h;
h_eff = sqrt((h_2prime(1)^2)+(h_2prime(2)^2));
if strcmp(mod_type,'Sph')==1 || strcmp(mod_type,'sph') ==1
if h_eff<=a
cov = sill - sill.*(1.5*(h_eff/a_minor)-0.5*((h_eff/a_minor)^3));
else
cov = sill;
end
elseif strcmp(mod_type,'Exp')==1 || strcmp(mod_type,'exp') ==1
cov = sill-(sill.*(1-exp(-(3*h_eff)/a_minor)));
elseif strcmp(mod_type,'Gauss')==1 || strcmp(mod_type,'gauss') ==1
cov = sill-(sill.*(1-exp(-((3*h_eff)^2/(a_minor^2)))));
end
and
function [PropertyAvg,variance_PropertyAvg,NormVariance_PropertyAvg]=...
general_AverageProperty(blocksize_row,blocksize_col,blocksize_t,...
nUpscaledRow,nUpscaledCol,nUpscaledT,PropertyArray,omega)
% This function computes average of a property and variance of that averaged
% property using power averaging
PropertyAvg=zeros(nUpscaledRow,nUpscaledCol,nUpscaledT);
%# Average of property
for k=1:nUpscaledT,
for j=1:nUpscaledCol,
for i=1:nUpscaledRow,
sum=0;
for a=1:blocksize_row,
for b=1:blocksize_col,
for c=1:blocksize_t,
sum=sum+(PropertyArray((i-1)*blocksize_row+a,(j-1)*blocksize_col+b,(k-1)*blocksize_t+c).^omega); % add all the property values in 'blocksize_x','blocksize_y','blocksize_t' to one variable
end
end
end
PropertyAvg(i,j,k)=(sum/(blocksize_row*blocksize_col*blocksize_t)).^(1/omega); % take average of the summed property
end
end
end
%# Variance of averageed property
variance_PropertyAvg=var(reshape(PropertyAvg,...
nUpscaledRow*nUpscaledCol*nUpscaledT,1),1,1);
%# Normalized variance of averageed property
NormVariance_PropertyAvg=variance_PropertyAvg./(var(reshape(...
PropertyArray,numel(PropertyArray),1),1,1));
Question: Using Matlab, I would like to optimize covAvg.Scale2 such that it matches closely with cov.Scale1 by perturbing/varying any (or all) of the following variables
1) a_minor
2) a_major
3) theta
I am aware I can use fminsearch, however, how I am not able to perturb the variables I want to while using this fminsearch.
I won't pretend to understand everything that you are doing. But it sounds like a typical minimization problem. What you want to do is to come up with a single function that takes a_minor, a_major and theta as arguments, and returns the square of the difference between covAvg.Scale2 and cov.Scale1. Something like this:
function diff = minimize_me(a_minor, a_major, theta)
... your script goes here
diff = (covAvg.Scale2 - cov.Scale1)^2;
end
Then you need matlab to minimize this function. There's more than one option here. Since you only have three variables to minimize over, fminsearch is a good place to start. You would call it something like this:
opts = optimset('display', 'iter');
x = fminsearch( #(x) minimize_me(x(1), x(2), x(3)), [a_minor_start a_major_start theta_start], opts)
The first argument to fminsearch is the function you want to optimize. It must take a single argument: a vector of the variables that will be perturbed in order to find the minimum value. Here I use an anonymous function to extract the values from this vector and pass them into minimize_me. The second argument to fminsearch is a vector containing the values to start searching at. The third argument are options that affect the search; it's a good idea to set display to iter when you first start optimizing, so that you can get an idea of well the optimizer is converging.
If your parameters have restricted domains (e.g. they must all be positive) take a look at fminsearchbnd on the file exchange.
If I have misunderstood your problem, and this doesn't help at all, try posting code that we can run to reproduce the problem ourselves.
I am coding a perceptron to learn to categorize gender in pictures of faces. I am very very new to MATLAB, so I need a lot of help. I have a few questions:
I am trying to code for a function:
function [y] = testset(x,w)
%y = sign(sigma(x*w-threshold))
where y is the predicted results, x is the training/testing set put in as a very large matrix, and w is weight on the equation. The part after the % is what I am trying to write, but I do not know how to write this in MATLAB code. Any ideas out there?
I am trying to code a second function:
function [err] = testerror(x,w,y)
%err = sigma(max(0,-w*x*y))
w, x, and y have the same values as stated above, and err is my function of error, which I am trying to minimize through the steps of the perceptron.
I am trying to create a step in my perceptron to lower the percent of error by using gradient descent on my original equation. Does anyone know how I can increment w using gradient descent in order to minimize the error function using an if then statement?
I can put up the code I have up till now if that would help you answer these questions.
Thank you!
edit--------------------------
OK, so I am still working on the code for this, and would like to put it up when I have something more complete. My biggest question right now is:
I have the following function:
function [y] = testset(x,w)
y = sign(sum(x*w-threshold))
Now I know that I am supposed to put a threshold in, but cannot figure out what I am supposed to put in as the threshold! any ideas out there?
edit----------------------------
this is what I have so far. Changes still need to be made to it, but I would appreciate input, especially regarding structure, and advice for making the changes that need to be made!
function [y] = Perceptron_Aviva(X,w)
y = sign(sum(X*w-1));
end
function [err] = testerror(X,w,y)
err = sum(max(0,-w*X*y));
end
%function [w] = perceptron(X,Y,w_init)
%w = w_init;
%end
%------------------------------
% input samples
X = X_train;
% output class [-1,+1];
Y = y_train;
% init weigth vector
w_init = zeros(size(X,1));
w = w_init;
%---------------------------------------------
loopcounter = 0
while abs(err) > 0.1 && loopcounter < 100
for j=1:size(X,1)
approx_y(j) = Perceptron_Aviva(X(j),w(j))
err = testerror(X(j),w(j),approx_y(j))
if err > 0 %wrong (structure is correct, test is wrong)
w(j) = w(j) - 0.1 %wrong
elseif err < 0 %wrong
w(j) = w(j) + 0.1 %wrong
end
% -----------
% if sign(w'*X(:,j)) ~= Y(j) %wrong decision?
% w = w + X(:,j) * Y(j); %then add (or subtract) this point to w
end
you can read this question I did some time ago.
I uses a matlab code and a function perceptron
function [w] = perceptron(X,Y,w_init)
w = w_init;
for iteration = 1 : 100 %<- in practice, use some stopping criterion!
for ii = 1 : size(X,2) %cycle through training set
if sign(w'*X(:,ii)) ~= Y(ii) %wrong decision?
w = w + X(:,ii) * Y(ii); %then add (or subtract) this point to w
end
end
sum(sign(w'*X)~=Y)/size(X,2) %show misclassification rate
end
and it is called from code (#Itamar Katz) like (random data):
% input samples
X1=[rand(1,100);rand(1,100);ones(1,100)]; % class '+1'
X2=[rand(1,100);1+rand(1,100);ones(1,100)]; % class '-1'
X=[X1,X2];
% output class [-1,+1];
Y=[-ones(1,100),ones(1,100)];
% init weigth vector
w=[.5 .5 .5]';
% call perceptron
wtag=perceptron(X,Y,w);
% predict
ytag=wtag'*X;
% plot prediction over origianl data
figure;hold on
plot(X1(1,:),X1(2,:),'b.')
plot(X2(1,:),X2(2,:),'r.')
plot(X(1,ytag<0),X(2,ytag<0),'bo')
plot(X(1,ytag>0),X(2,ytag>0),'ro')
legend('class -1','class +1','pred -1','pred +1')
I guess this can give you an idea to make the functions you described.
To the error compare the expected result with the real result (class)
Assume your dataset is X, the datapoins, and Y, the labels of the classes.
f=newp(X,Y)
creates a perceptron.
If you want to create an MLP then:
f=newff(X,Y,NN)
where NN is the network architecture, i.e. an array that designates the number of neurons at each hidden layer. For example
NN=[5 3 2]
will correspond to an network with 5 neurons at the first layers, 3 at the second and 2 a the third hidden layer.
Well what you call threshold is the Bias in machine learning nomenclature. This should be left as an input for the user because it is used during training.
Also, I wonder why you are not using the builtin matlab functions. i.e newp or newff. e.g.
ff=newp(X,Y)
Then you can set the properties of the object ff to do your job for selecting gradient descent and so on.