Let's say we have the following data:
A1= [41.3251
18.2350
9.9891
36.1722
50.8702
32.1519
44.6284
60.0892
58.1297
34.7482
34.6447
6.7361
1.2960
1.9778
2.0422];
A2=[86.3924
86.4882
86.1717
85.8506
85.8634
86.1267
86.4304
86.6406
86.5022
86.1384
86.5500
86.2765
86.7044
86.8075
86.9007];
When I plot the above data using plot(A1,A2);, I get this graph:
Is there any way to make the graph look smooth like a cubic plot?
Yes you can. You can interpolate in between the keypoints. This will require a bit of trickery though. Blindly using interpolation with any of MATLAB's commands won't work because they require that the independent axes (the x-axis in your case) to increase. You can't do this with your data currently... at least out of the box. Therefore you'll have to create a dummy list of values that span from 1 up to as many elements as there are in A1 (or A2 as they're both equal in size) to create an independent axis and interpolate both arrays independently by specifying the dummy list with a finer spacing in resolution. This finer spacing is controlled by the total number of new points you want to introduce in the plot. These points will be defined within the range of the dummy list but the spacing in between each point will decrease as you increase the total number of new points. As a general rule, the more points you add the less spacing there will be and so the plot should be more smooth. Once you do that, plot the final values together.
Here's some code for you to run. We will be using interp1 to perform the interpolation for us and most of the work. The function linspace creates the finer grid of points in the dummy list to facilitate the interpolation. N would be the total number of desired points you want to plot. I've made it 500 for now meaning that 500 points will be used for interpolation using your original data. Experiment by increasing (or decreasing) the total number of points and seeing what effect this has in the smoothness of your data.
I'll also be using the Piecewise Cubic Hermite Interpolating Polynomial or pchip as the method of interpolation, which is basically cubic spline interpolation if you want to get technical. Assuming that A1 and A2 are already created:
%// Specify number of interpolating points
N = 500;
%// Specify dummy list of points
D = 1 : numel(A1);
%// Generate finer grid of points
NN = linspace(1, numel(A1), N);
%// Interpolate each set of points independently
A1interp = interp1(D, A1, NN, 'pchip');
A2interp = interp1(D, A2, NN, 'pchip');
%// Plot the data
plot(A1interp, A2interp);
I now get the following:
Related
I have three variables, e.g., latitude, longitude and temperature. For each latitude and longitude, I have corresponding temperature value. I want to plot latitude v/s longitude plot in 5 degree x 5 degree grid , with mean temperature value inserted in that particular grid instead of occurring frequency.
Data= [latGrid,lonGrid] = meshgrid(25:45,125:145);
T = table(latGrid(:),lonGrid(:),randi([0,35],size(latGrid(:))),...
'VariableNames',{'lat','lon','temp'});
At the end, I need it somewhat like the following image:
Sounds to me like you want to scale your grid. The easiest way to do this is to smooth and downsample.
While 2d histograms also bin values into a grid, using a histogram is not the way to find the mean of datapoints in a smooth grid. A histogram counts the occurrence of values in a set of ranges. In a 2d example, a histogram would take the input measurements [1, 3, 3, 5] and count the number of ones, the number of threes, etc. A 2d histogram will count occurrences of pairs of numbers. (You might want to use histogram to help organize a measurements taken at irregular intervals, but that would be a different question)
How to smooth and downsample without the Image Processing Toolbox
Keep your data in the 2d matrix format rather than reshaping it into a table. This makes it easier to find the neighbors of each grid location.
%% Sample Data
[latGrid,lonGrid] = meshgrid(25:45,125:145);
temp = rand(size(latGrid));
There are many tools in Matlab for smoothing matrices. If you want to have the mean of a 5x5 window. You can write a for-loop, use a convolution, or use filter2. My example uses convolution. For more on convolutional filters, I suggest the wikipedia page.
%% Mean filter with conv2
M = ones(5) ./ 25; % 5x5 mean or box blur filter
C_temp = conv2(temp, M, 'valid');
C_temp is a blurry version of the original temperature variable with a slightly smaller size because we can't accurately take the mean of the edges. The border is reduced by a frame of 2 measurements. Now, we just need to take every fifth measurement from C_temp to scale down the grid.
%% Subsample result
C_temp = C_temp(1:5:end, 1:5:end);
% Because we removed a border from C_temp, we also need to remove a border from latGrid and lonGrid
[h, w] = size(latGrid)
latGrid = latGrid(5:5:h-5, 5:5:w-5);
lonGrid = lonGrid(5:5:h-5, 5:5,w-5);
Here's what the steps look like
If you use a slightly more organized, temp variable. It's easier to see that the result is correct.
With Image Processing Toolbox
imresize has a box filter method option that is equivalent to a mean filter. However, you have to do a little calculation to find the scaling factor that is equivalent to using a 5x5 window.
C_temp = imresize(temp, scale, 'box');
Let's say we have the following data:
A1= [41.3251
18.2350
9.9891
36.1722
50.8702
32.1519
44.6284
60.0892
58.1297
34.7482
34.6447
6.7361
1.2960
1.9778
2.0422];
A2=[86.3924
86.4882
86.1717
85.8506
85.8634
86.1267
86.4304
86.6406
86.5022
86.1384
86.5500
86.2765
86.7044
86.8075
86.9007];
When I plot the above data using plot(A1,A2);, I get this graph:
Is there any way to make the graph look smooth like a cubic plot?
Yes you can. You can interpolate in between the keypoints. This will require a bit of trickery though. Blindly using interpolation with any of MATLAB's commands won't work because they require that the independent axes (the x-axis in your case) to increase. You can't do this with your data currently... at least out of the box. Therefore you'll have to create a dummy list of values that span from 1 up to as many elements as there are in A1 (or A2 as they're both equal in size) to create an independent axis and interpolate both arrays independently by specifying the dummy list with a finer spacing in resolution. This finer spacing is controlled by the total number of new points you want to introduce in the plot. These points will be defined within the range of the dummy list but the spacing in between each point will decrease as you increase the total number of new points. As a general rule, the more points you add the less spacing there will be and so the plot should be more smooth. Once you do that, plot the final values together.
Here's some code for you to run. We will be using interp1 to perform the interpolation for us and most of the work. The function linspace creates the finer grid of points in the dummy list to facilitate the interpolation. N would be the total number of desired points you want to plot. I've made it 500 for now meaning that 500 points will be used for interpolation using your original data. Experiment by increasing (or decreasing) the total number of points and seeing what effect this has in the smoothness of your data.
I'll also be using the Piecewise Cubic Hermite Interpolating Polynomial or pchip as the method of interpolation, which is basically cubic spline interpolation if you want to get technical. Assuming that A1 and A2 are already created:
%// Specify number of interpolating points
N = 500;
%// Specify dummy list of points
D = 1 : numel(A1);
%// Generate finer grid of points
NN = linspace(1, numel(A1), N);
%// Interpolate each set of points independently
A1interp = interp1(D, A1, NN, 'pchip');
A2interp = interp1(D, A2, NN, 'pchip');
%// Plot the data
plot(A1interp, A2interp);
I now get the following:
Below is my code for the plot. How to make the plot more smoother.
len1 = [25, 250, 500, 750, 1000];
for k1 = 1:length(len1)
standard_deviation1(k1) = std(resdphs(1:5000, len1(k1)));
end
f10 = [110, 100, 90, 80, 70];
figure(3),plot(f10, standard_deviation1);xlabel('frequency'); ylabel('standarddev');
grid
As stated in the comments, you can first try to apply a moving average to your data which applies local smoothing to overlapping windows in your data. However, for this to be successful, you must have a higher point density to achieve good smoothing. Currently, your plot only has a few points uniformly spaced at 500 units and so moving average will significantly alter the way the plot looks. I'll show you an example soon.
Let's get back to the method at hand. First, apply linear interpolation between each of the points to get a higher point density. After you apply linear interpolation, you can apply the moving average operation with conv. However, what will happen is that in between your keypoints will exist artificial data that isn't representative of your problem. I'd also like to mention that this plot is for aesthetic purposes and the data in between the keypoints should not be used for any critical decisions.
If you simply want to plot the points, consider not using plot and using stem instead. In any case, use interp1 as the base method for interpolating in between the keypoints. Once you do that, you can apply a moving average by convolution - specifically, use a kernel that has a small amount of filter taps that are all equally weighted. Something like a 5-tap window or 7-tap window may suffice.
Using the variables that you declared above:
%// Specify number of total points
num_points = 300;
%// Specify moving average window
move_size = 7;
%// Specify interpolated y coordinates
xpts = linspace(min(f10), max(f10), num_points);
out = interp1(f10, standard_deviation1, xpts, 'linear');
%// Apply moving average
kernel = (1/move_size)*(ones(1,move_size));
out_smooth = conv(out, kernel, 'same');
%// Also apply moving average on the raw data itself for demonstration
out_smooth_raw = conv(standard_deviation1, kernel, 'same');
%// Plot everything
plot(f10, standard_deviation1, f10, out_smooth_raw, 'x-', xpts, out_smooth);
legend('Original Data', 'Smoothed Data - Raw', 'Smoothed Data - Interpolated');
Let's do this with some example data:
f10 = 0 : 500 : 5000;
rng(123); %// Set seed for reproducibility
standard_deviation1 = rand(1,numel(f10));
Using the above data and with the above code, we get this plot:
As you can see, applying a moving average on your data without interpolation significantly alters the data because of the resolution. If you apply interpolation first, then apply a moving average, you will see that you get a somewhat better representation of your original data with the corners smoothed. Bear in mind that the data at the beginning and at the end of the smoothened result will be meaningless as you would be taking the moving average of windows with zeros padded into the data to allow the calculations to work.
I would like to plot some figures like this one:
-axis being real and imag part of some complex valued vector(usually either pure real or imag)
-have some 3D visualization like in the given case
First, define your complex function as a function of (Re(x), Im(x)). In complex analysis, you can decompose any complex function into its real parts and imaginary parts. In other words:
F(x) = Re(x) + i*Im(x)
In the case of a two-dimensional grid, you can obviously extend to defining the function in terms of (x,y). In other words:
F(x,y) = Re(x,y) + i*Im(x,y)
In your case, I'm assuming you'd want the 2D approach. As such, let's use I and J to represent the real parts and imaginary parts separately. Also, let's start off with a simple example, like cos(x) + i*sin(y) which is based on the very popular Euler exponential function. It isn't exact, but I modified it slightly as the plot looks nice.
Here are the steps you would do in MATLAB:
Define your function in terms of I and J
Make a set of points in both domains - something like meshgrid will work
Use a 3D visualization plot - You can plot the individual points, or plot it on a surface (like surf, or mesh).
NB: Because this is a complex valued function, let's plot the magnitude of the output. You were pretty ambiguous with your details, so let's assume we are plotting the magnitude.
Let's do this in code line by line:
% // Step #1
F = #(I,J) cos(I) + i*sin(J);
% // Step #2
[I,J] = meshgrid(-4:0.01:4, -4:0.01:4);
% // Step #3
K = F(I,J);
% // Let's make it look nice!
mesh(I,J,abs(K));
xlabel('Real');
ylabel('Imaginary');
zlabel('Magnitude');
colorbar;
This is the resultant plot that you get:
Let's step through this code slowly. Step #1 is an anonymous function that is defined in terms of I and J. Step #2 defines I and J as matrices where each location in I and J gives you the real and imaginary co-ordinates at their matching spatial locations to be evaluated in the complex function. I have defined both of the domains to be between [-4,4]. The first parameter spans the real axis while the second parameter spans the imaginary axis. Obviously change the limits as you see fit. Make sure the step size is small enough so that the plot is smooth. Step #3 will take each complex value and evaluate what the resultant is. After, you create a 3D mesh plot that will plot the real and imaginary axis in the first two dimensions and the magnitude of the complex number in the third dimension. abs() takes the absolute value in MATLAB. If the contents within the matrix are real, then it simply returns the positive of the number. If the contents within the matrix are complex, then it returns the magnitude / length of the complex value.
I have labeled the axes as well as placed a colorbar on the side to visualize the heights of the surface plot as colours. It also gives you an idea of how high and how long the values are in a more pleasing and visual way.
As a gentle push in your direction, let's take a slice out of this complex function. Let's make the real component equal to 0, while the imaginary components span between [-4,4]. Instead of using mesh or surf, you can use plot3 to plot your points. As such, try something like this:
F = #(I,J) cos(I) + i*sin(J);
J = -4:0.01:4;
I = zeros(1,length(J));
K = F(I,J);
plot3(I, J, abs(K));
xlabel('Real');
ylabel('Imaginary');
zlabel('Magnitude');
grid;
plot3 does not provide a grid by default, which is why the grid command is there. This is what I get:
As expected, if the function is purely imaginary, there should only be a sinusoidal contribution (i*sin(y)).
You can play around with this and add more traces if you need to.
Hope this helps!
I have a Matlab figure I want to use in a paper. This figure contains multiple cdfplots.
Now the problem is that I cannot use the markers because the become very dense in the plot.
If i want to make the samples sparse I have to drop some samples from the cdfplot which will result in a different cdfplot line.
How can I add enough markers while maintaining the actual line?
One method is to get XData/YData properties from your curves follow solution (1) from #ephsmith and set it back. Here is an example for one curve.
y = evrnd(0,3,100,1); %# random data
%# original data
subplot(1,2,1)
h = cdfplot(y);
set(h,'Marker','*','MarkerSize',8,'MarkerEdgeColor','r','LineStyle','none')
%# reduced data
subplot(1,2,2)
h = cdfplot(y);
set(h,'Marker','*','MarkerSize',8,'MarkerEdgeColor','r','LineStyle','none')
xdata = get(h,'XData');
ydata = get(h,'YData');
set(h,'XData',xdata(1:5:end));
set(h,'YData',ydata(1:5:end));
Another method is to calculate empirical CDF separately using ECDF function, then reduce the results before plotting with PLOT.
y = evrnd(0,3,100,1); %# random data
[f, x] = ecdf(y);
%# original data
subplot(1,2,1)
plot(x,f,'*')
%# reduced data
subplot(1,2,2)
plot(x(1:5:end),f(1:5:end),'r*')
Result
I know this is potentially unnecessary given MATLAB's built-in functions (in the Statistics Toolbox anyway) but it may be of use to other viewers who do not have access to the toolbox.
The empirical CMF (CDF) is essentially the cumulative sum of the empirical PMF. The latter is attainable in MATLAB via the hist function. In order to get a nice approximation to the empirical PMF, the number of bins must be selected appropriately. In the following example, I assume that 64 bins is good enough for your data.
%# compute a histogram with 64 bins for the data points stored in y
[f,x]=hist(y,64);
%# convert the frequency points in f to proportions
f = f./sum(f);
%# compute the cumulative sum of the empirical PMF
cmf = cumsum(f);
Now you can choose how many points you'd like to plot by using the reduced data example given by yuk.
n=20 ; % number of total data markers in the curve graph
M_n = round(linspace(1,numel(y),n)) ; % indices of markers
% plot the whole line, and markers for selected data points
plot(x,y,'b-',y(M_n),y(M_n),'rs')
verry simple.....
try reducing the marker size.
x = rand(10000,1);
y = x + rand(10000,1);
plot(x,y,'b.','markersize',1);
For publishing purposes I tend to use the plot tools on the figure window. This allow you to tweak all of the plot parameters and immediately see the result.
If the problem is that you have too many data points, you can:
1). Plot using every nth sample of the data. Experiment to find an n that results in the look you want.
2). I typically fit curves to my data and add a few sparsely placed markers to plots of the fits to differentiate the curves.
Honestly, for publishing purposes I have always found that choosing different 'LineStyle' or 'LineWidth' properties for the lines gives much cleaner results than using different markers. This would also be a lot easier than trying to downsample your data, and for plots made with CDFPLOT I find that markers simply occlude the stairstep nature of the lines.