Suppose that we have a matrix
A = [1 2 ; 3 4 ; 5 6];
and a logical matrix
B = [false true ; true true ; true false ];
I would like to obtain the row product of elements in A such that the corresponding element in B is true. In the example above, the answer is
C = [2 ; 3*4, 5] = [2 ; 12 ; 5];
One method would be to: 1) Take the power of A with respect to B; 2) Take the row product of the power matrix:
C = prod(A.^B,2);
The above command seems to perform unnecessary computation. Is there a faster way of computing C above?
Your method seems quite fast to me. If you really have a bottleneck there, you can maybe try with cheaper operators, like addition and multiplication:
C = prod(A.*B + ~B, 2);
I only tested it with octave, but it's about twice as fast.
Another less compact way, also fast in octave:
C=A; C(~B)=1; C=prod(C,2);
Here's another way, using accumarray. I doubt it's faster:
[ii, ~] = find(B); % create grouping variable
C = accumarray(ii, A(B), [], #prod); % compute product of each group
Does any one know how I can convert a row vector [6 8 2] into a column vector without using a builtin command. I would like to do it without for loop.A ny idea please. Some one asked me is it a home work I say no, it's part of my work. I am trying to convert MATLAB code to vhdl using hdl coder but hdl coder seems not supporting transpose function.
Some options:
R = 1:10; %// A row vector
%// using built-in transpose
C = R'; %'// be warned this finds the complex conjugate
C = R.'; %'// Just swaps the rows and columns
C = transpose(R);
%// Flattening with the colon operator
C = R(:); %// usually the best option as it also convert columns to columns...
%// Using reshape
C = reshape(R,[],1);
%// Using permute
C = permute(R, [2,1]);
%// Via pre-allocation
C = zeros(numel(R),1);
C(1:end) = R(1:end);
%// Or explicitly using a for loop (note that you really should pre-allocate using zeros for this method as well
C = zeros(numel(R),1); %// technically optional but has a major performance impact
for k = 1:numel(R)
C(k,1) = R(k); %// If you preallocated then C(k)=R(k) will work too
end
%// A silly matrix multiplication method
C = diag(ones(numel(R),1)*R)
You can use the (:) trick
t = [1 2 3];
t(:)
ans =
1
2
3
UPDATE: you should use this method only in the following case: you have a vector (not matrix) and want to make sure it is a column-vector. This method is useful, when you don't know what type (column, row) of vector a variable has.
Check this out
t = [1 2 3]'; %// column vector
t(:)
ans =
1
2
3
However
A=magic(3);
A(:)
ans =
8
3
4
1
5
9
6
7
2
What I intend to do is very simple but yet I haven't found a proper way to do it. I have a function handle which depends on two variables, for example:
f = #(i,j) i+j
(mine is quite more complicated, though)
What I'd like to do is to create a matrix M such that
M(i,j) = f(i,j)
Of course I could use a nested loop but I'm trying to avoid those. I've already managed to do this in Maple in a quite simple way:
f:=(i,j)->i+j;
M:=Matrix(N,f);
(Where N is the dimension of the matrix) But I need to use MATLAB for this. For now I'm sticking to the nested loops but I'd really appreciate your help!
Use bsxfun:
>> [ii jj] = ndgrid(1:4 ,1:5); %// change i and j limits as needed
>> M = bsxfun(f, ii, jj)
M =
2 3 4 5 6
3 4 5 6 7
4 5 6 7 8
5 6 7 8 9
If your function f satisfies the following condition:
C = fun(A,B) accepts arrays A and B of arbitrary, but equal size and returns output of the same size. Each element in the output array C is the result of an operation on the corresponding elements of A and B only. fun must also support scalar expansion, such that if A or B is a scalar, C is the result of applying the scalar to every element in the other input array.
you can dispose of ndgrid. Just add a transpose (.') to the first (i) vector:
>> M = bsxfun(f, (1:4).', 1:5)
Function handles can accept matrices as inputs. Simply pass a square matrix of size N where the values corresponds to the row number for i, and a square matrix of size N where the values correspond to the column number for j.
N = 5;
f = #(i,j) i+j;
M = f(meshgrid(1:N+1), meshgrid(1:N+1)')
You can apply a function to every item in a vector by saying, for example, v + 1, or you can use the function arrayfun. How can I do it for every row/column of a matrix without using a for loop?
Many built-in operations like sum and prod are already able to operate across rows or columns, so you may be able to refactor the function you are applying to take advantage of this.
If that's not a viable option, one way to do it is to collect the rows or columns into cells using mat2cell or num2cell, then use cellfun to operate on the resulting cell array.
As an example, let's say you want to sum the columns of a matrix M. You can do this simply using sum:
M = magic(10); %# A 10-by-10 matrix
columnSums = sum(M, 1); %# A 1-by-10 vector of sums for each column
And here is how you would do this using the more complicated num2cell/cellfun option:
M = magic(10); %# A 10-by-10 matrix
C = num2cell(M, 1); %# Collect the columns into cells
columnSums = cellfun(#sum, C); %# A 1-by-10 vector of sums for each cell
You may want the more obscure Matlab function bsxfun. From the Matlab documentation, bsxfun "applies the element-by-element binary operation specified by the function handle fun to arrays A and B, with singleton expansion enabled."
#gnovice stated above that sum and other basic functions already operate on the first non-singleton dimension (i.e., rows if there's more than one row, columns if there's only one row, or higher dimensions if the lower dimensions all have size==1). However, bsxfun works for any function, including (and especially) user-defined functions.
For example, let's say you have a matrix A and a row vector B. E.g., let's say:
A = [1 2 3;
4 5 6;
7 8 9]
B = [0 1 2]
You want a function power_by_col which returns in a vector C all the elements in A to the power of the corresponding column of B.
From the above example, C is a 3x3 matrix:
C = [1^0 2^1 3^2;
4^0 5^1 6^2;
7^0 8^1 9^2]
i.e.,
C = [1 2 9;
1 5 36;
1 8 81]
You could do this the brute force way using repmat:
C = A.^repmat(B, size(A, 1), 1)
Or you could do this the classy way using bsxfun, which internally takes care of the repmat step:
C = bsxfun(#(x,y) x.^y, A, B)
So bsxfun saves you some steps (you don't need to explicitly calculate the dimensions of A). However, in some informal tests of mine, it turns out that repmat is roughly twice as fast if the function to be applied (like my power function, above) is simple. So you'll need to choose whether you want simplicity or speed.
I can't comment on how efficient this is, but here's a solution:
applyToGivenRow = #(func, matrix) #(row) func(matrix(row, :))
applyToRows = #(func, matrix) arrayfun(applyToGivenRow(func, matrix), 1:size(matrix,1))'
% Example
myMx = [1 2 3; 4 5 6; 7 8 9];
myFunc = #sum;
applyToRows(myFunc, myMx)
Building on Alex's answer, here is a more generic function:
applyToGivenRow = #(func, matrix) #(row) func(matrix(row, :));
newApplyToRows = #(func, matrix) arrayfun(applyToGivenRow(func, matrix), 1:size(matrix,1), 'UniformOutput', false)';
takeAll = #(x) reshape([x{:}], size(x{1},2), size(x,1))';
genericApplyToRows = #(func, matrix) takeAll(newApplyToRows(func, matrix));
Here is a comparison between the two functions:
>> % Example
myMx = [1 2 3; 4 5 6; 7 8 9];
myFunc = #(x) [mean(x), std(x), sum(x), length(x)];
>> genericApplyToRows(myFunc, myMx)
ans =
2 1 6 3
5 1 15 3
8 1 24 3
>> applyToRows(myFunc, myMx)
??? Error using ==> arrayfun
Non-scalar in Uniform output, at index 1, output 1.
Set 'UniformOutput' to false.
Error in ==> #(func,matrix)arrayfun(applyToGivenRow(func,matrix),1:size(matrix,1))'
For completeness/interest I'd like to add that matlab does have a function that allows you to operate on data per-row rather than per-element. It is called rowfun (http://www.mathworks.se/help/matlab/ref/rowfun.html), but the only "problem" is that it operates on tables (http://www.mathworks.se/help/matlab/ref/table.html) rather than matrices.
Adding to the evolving nature of the answer to this question, starting with r2016b, MATLAB will implicitly expand singleton dimensions, removing the need for bsxfun in many cases.
From the r2016b release notes:
Implicit Expansion: Apply element-wise operations and functions to arrays with automatic expansion of dimensions of length 1
Implicit expansion is a generalization of scalar expansion. With
scalar expansion, a scalar expands to be the same size as another
array to facilitate element-wise operations. With implicit expansion,
the element-wise operators and functions listed here can implicitly
expand their inputs to be the same size, as long as the arrays have
compatible sizes. Two arrays have compatible sizes if, for every
dimension, the dimension sizes of the inputs are either the same or
one of them is 1. See Compatible Array Sizes for Basic Operations and
Array vs. Matrix Operations for more information.
Element-wise arithmetic operators — +, -, .*, .^, ./, .\
Relational operators — <, <=, >, >=, ==, ~=
Logical operators — &, |, xor
Bit-wise functions — bitand, bitor, bitxor
Elementary math functions — max, min, mod, rem, hypot, atan2, atan2d
For example, you can calculate the mean of each column in a matrix A,
and then subtract the vector of mean values from each column with A -
mean(A).
Previously, this functionality was available via the bsxfun function.
It is now recommended that you replace most uses of bsxfun with direct
calls to the functions and operators that support implicit expansion.
Compared to using bsxfun, implicit expansion offers faster speed,
better memory usage, and improved readability of code.
None of the above answers worked "out of the box" for me, however, the following function, obtained by copying the ideas of the other answers works:
apply_func_2_cols = #(f,M) cell2mat(cellfun(f,num2cell(M,1), 'UniformOutput',0));
It takes a function f and applies it to every column of the matrix M.
So for example:
f = #(v) [0 1;1 0]*v + [0 0.1]';
apply_func_2_cols(f,[0 0 1 1;0 1 0 1])
ans =
0.00000 1.00000 0.00000 1.00000
0.10000 0.10000 1.10000 1.10000
With recent versions of Matlab, you can use the Table data structure to your advantage. There's even a 'rowfun' operation but I found it easier just to do this:
a = magic(6);
incrementRow = cell2mat(cellfun(#(x) x+1,table2cell(table(a)),'UniformOutput',0))
or here's an older one I had that doesn't require tables, for older Matlab versions.
dataBinner = cell2mat(arrayfun(#(x) Binner(a(x,:),2)',1:size(a,1),'UniformOutput',0)')
The accepted answer seems to be to convert to cells first and then use cellfun to operate over all of the cells. I do not know the specific application, but in general I would think using bsxfun to operate over the matrix would be more efficient. Basically bsxfun applies an operation element-by-element across two arrays. So if you wanted to multiply each item in an n x 1 vector by each item in an m x 1 vector to get an n x m array, you could use:
vec1 = [ stuff ]; % n x 1 vector
vec2 = [ stuff ]; % m x 1 vector
result = bsxfun('times', vec1.', vec2);
This will give you matrix called result wherein the (i, j) entry will be the ith element of vec1 multiplied by the jth element of vec2.
You can use bsxfun for all sorts of built-in functions, and you can declare your own. The documentation has a list of many built-in functions, but basically you can name any function that accepts two arrays (vector or matrix) as arguments and get it to work.
I like splitapply, which allows a function to be applied to the columns of A using splitapply(fun,A,1:size(A,2)).
For example
A = magic(5);
B = splitapply(#(x) x+1, A, 1:size(A,2));
C = splitapply(#std, A, 1:size(A,2));
To apply the function to the rows, you could use
splitapply(fun, A', 1:size(A,1))';
(My source for this solution is here.)
Stumbled upon this question/answer while seeking how to compute the row sums of a matrix.
I would just like to add that Matlab's SUM function actually has support for summing for a given dimension, i.e a standard matrix with two dimensions.
So to calculate the column sums do:
colsum = sum(M) % or sum(M, 1)
and for the row sums, simply do
rowsum = sum(M, 2)
My bet is that this is faster than both programming a for loop and converting to cells :)
All this can be found in the matlab help for SUM.
if you know the length of your rows you can make something like this:
a=rand(9,3);
b=rand(9,3);
arrayfun(#(x1,x2,y1,y2,z1,z2) line([x1,x2],[y1,y2],[z1,z2]) , a(:,1),b(:,1),a(:,2),b(:,2),a(:,3),b(:,3) )
I'm a little surprised that MATLAB doesn't have a Map function, so I hacked one together myself since it's something I can't live without. Is there a better version out there? Is there a somewhat-standard functional programming library for MATLAB out there that I'm missing?
function results = map(f,list)
% why doesn't MATLAB have a Map function?
results = zeros(1,length(list));
for k = 1:length(list)
results(1,k) = f(list(k));
end
end
usage would be e.g.
map( #(x)x^2,1:10)
The short answer: the built-in function arrayfun does exactly what your map function does for numeric arrays:
>> y = arrayfun(#(x) x^2, 1:10)
y =
1 4 9 16 25 36 49 64 81 100
There are two other built-in functions that behave similarly: cellfun (which operates on elements of cell arrays) and structfun (which operates on each field of a structure).
However, these functions are often not necessary if you take advantage of vectorization, specifically using element-wise arithmetic operators. For the example you gave, a vectorized solution would be:
>> x = 1:10;
>> y = x.^2
y =
1 4 9 16 25 36 49 64 81 100
Some operations will automatically operate across elements (like adding a scalar value to a vector) while others operators have a special syntax for element-wise operation (denoted by a . before the operator). Many built-in functions in MATLAB are designed to operate on vector and matrix arguments using element-wise operations (often applied to a given dimension, such as sum and mean for example), and thus don't require map functions.
To summarize, here are some different ways to square each element in an array:
x = 1:10; % Sample array
f = #(x) x.^2; % Anonymous function that squares each element of its input
% Option #1:
y = x.^2; % Use the element-wise power operator
% Option #2:
y = f(x); % Pass a vector to f
% Option #3:
y = arrayfun(f, x); % Pass each element to f separately
Of course, for such a simple operation, option #1 is the most sensible (and efficient) choice.
In addition to vector and element-wise operations, there's also cellfun for mapping functions over cell arrays. For example:
cellfun(#upper, {'a', 'b', 'c'}, 'UniformOutput',false)
ans =
'A' 'B' 'C'
If 'UniformOutput' is true (or not provided), it will attempt to concatenate the results according to the dimensions of the cell array, so
cellfun(#upper, {'a', 'b', 'c'})
ans =
ABC
A rather simple solution, using Matlab's vectorization would be:
a = [ 10 20 30 40 50 ]; % the array with the original values
b = [ 10 8 6 4 2 ]; % the mapping array
c = zeros( 1, 10 ); % your target array
Now, typing
c( b ) = a
returns
c = 0 50 0 40 0 30 0 20 0 10
c( b ) is a reference to a vector of size 5 with the elements of c at the indices given by b. Now if you assing values to this reference vector, the original values in c are overwritten, since c( b ) contains references to the values in c and no copies.
It seems that the built-in arrayfun doesn't work if the result needed is an array of function:
eg:
map(#(x)[x x^2 x^3],1:10)
slight mods below make this work better:
function results = map(f,list)
% why doesn't MATLAB have a Map function?
for k = 1:length(list)
if (k==1)
r1=f(list(k));
results = zeros(length(r1),length(list));
results(:,k)=r1;
else
results(:,k) = f(list(k));
end;
end;
end
If matlab does not have a built in map function, it could be because of efficiency considerations. In your implementation you are using a loop to iterate over the elements of the list, which is generally frowned upon in the matlab world. Most built-in matlab functions are "vectorized", i. e. it is more efficient to call a function on an entire array, than to iterate over it yourself and call the function for each element.
In other words, this
a = 1:10;
a.^2
is much faster than this
a = 1:10;
map(#(x)x^2, a)
assuming your definition of map.
You don't need map since a scalar-function that is applied to a list of values is applied to each of the values and hence works similar to map. Just try
l = 1:10
f = #(x) x + 1
f(l)
In your particular case, you could even write
l.^2
Vectorizing the solution as described in the previous answers is the probably the best solution for speed. Vectorizing is also very Matlaby and feels good.
With that said Matlab does now have a Map container class.
See http://www.mathworks.com/help/matlab/map-containers.html