I have certain movement data acquired from motion capture system which I want to automatically choose which 5 signals are more alike.
Picture shows example of the particular data, all normalized to 100 samples due to the difference in speed.
Data set for knee flexion/extension
What I am looking for is some idea to actually compare the shapes of the curves.
The easiest solution is just to substract the "raw" curves and check which one has the smallest RMSE.
But looking at your data (which are smooth curves), another option is to use PLS or GMM to describe them. Then you can use RMSE to compute the error between your input curve and your database of curves and take the one with lowest error.
Related
Provided that I have a similar example:
where the blue data is my calculated/measured data and my red data is the given groundtruth data. The task is to get the similarity/closeness between the data and each of the given curves so that a classification can be done, it could also be possible to choose multiple classes if the results seem to be very close.
I can divide the problem in my mind to several subproblems:
The data range is no the same
The resolution of the calculated/measured data is higher than the ground-truth data
The calculated data has some bias/shift
The following questions come to my mind when trying to solve those problems
Is it better to fit the calculated/measured data first then attempting to solve the problem?
Would it be fine to use the data points as is and calculate the mean squared error of each curve assuming it is a fitting attempt and thus getting the best fit? What would be the effect of the bias/shift in this case?
What is a good approach to dealing with the data/range mismatch, by decreasing the number of samples for the higher sampled version or increasing the number of samples for the lower sampled data in the given range?
I have a application for tracking, then I will have the player object as the following photo shows. I need to do the following:
1- detect features from each frames and match them with the next frame, I use SURF
2- calculate the average point from the feature points which I have estimated from step 1
3- calculate distance between the average point that estimated at step 2, between each two frames.
then I am able to save the location for the matched features,
surfPoints.Location
but still I don't know what is the best way to get center of mass for these points, or take average for them?
Also how to filter the miss matched points, I see that there is a function estimateGeometricTransform , but this function remove many points from the matched ones !
is there any good approach for that?
So let me sum up :
You have two keypoint arrays, and matching function that gives you indices of matches in both lists ("keypoint 7 in original list is ~ matching keypoint 12 in the second")
So now your question is to evaluate global shift from these local displacements, taking into account outliers ?
In that case (fitting a model given outliers) you should really look into RANSAC song (and the eternally funny RANSAC song)
Although the algorithm works great, it is non-deterministic (as it will involve trying out models based on random samples and evaluating the number of outliers)
I'll let you do the reading on RANSAC's theory (simple statistics), now let's see how to use RANSAC in your case :
Your problem is thus : given a list of 2D vectors, find the best 2D vector that minimizes the number of "outliers"
The model fitting step is then just picking a vector out of the list of vector
Outliers are vectors that go "CRAZY WRONG" in direction or norm
Also, RANSAC explained by Mathworks
The difficulty here is that you have non-rigid motion. estimateGeometricTransform is great when the motion can be described by an affine or a projective transformation. However, because you are tracking a complex articulated object, like a person, the motion is much more complicated. This is why estimateGeometericTransform rejects a lot of matches as outliers.
There are several things you can try. One is to try using vision.PointTracker to track the points. It uses the KLT (Kanade-Lucas-Tomasi) algorithm.
Alternatively, if your camera is stationary, you can try using vision.ForegroundDetector, which implements background subtraction. It will give you a binary mask showing all moving objects.
I am generation some data whose plots are as shown below
In all the plots i get some outliers at the beginning and at the end. Currently i am truncating the first and the last 10 values. Is there a better way to handle this?
I am basically trying to automatically identify the two points shown below.
This is a fairly general problem with lots of approaches, usually you will use some a priori knowledge of the underlying system to make it tractable.
So for instance if you expect to see the pattern above - a fast drop, a linear section (up or down) and a fast rise - you could try taking the derivative of the curve and looking for large values and/or sign reversals. Perhaps it would help to bin the data first.
If your pattern is not so easy to define but you are expecting a linear trend you might fit the data to an appropriate class of curve using fit and then detect outliers as those whose error from the fit exceeds a given threshold.
In either case you still have to choose thresholds - mean, variance and higher order moments can help here but you would probably have to analyse existing data (your training set) to determine the values empirically.
And perhaps, after all that, as Shai points out, you may find that lopping off the first and last ten points gives the best results for the time you spent (cf. Pareto principle).
I am trying to resample/recreate already recorded data for plotting purposes. I thought this is best place to ask the question (besides dsp.se).
The data is sampled at high frequency, contains to much data points and not suitable for plotting in time domain (not enough memory). i want to sample it with minimal loss. The sampling interval of the resulting data doesn't need to be same (well it is again for plotting purposes, not analysis) although input data in equally sampled.
When we use the regular resample command from matlab/octave, it can distort stiff pieces of the curve.
What is the best approach here?
For reference I put two pictures found in tex.se)
First image is regular resample
Second image is a better resampled data that can well behave around peaks.
You should try this set of files from the File Exchange. It computes optimal lookup table based on either the maximum set of points or a given error. You can choose from natural, linear, or spline for the interpolation methods. Spline will have the smallest table size but is slower than linear. I don't use natural unless I have a really good reason.
Sincerely,
Jason
I have two datasets at the time (in the form of vectors) and I plot them on the same axis to see how they relate with each other, and I specifically note and look for places where both graphs have a similar shape (i.e places where both have seemingly positive/negative gradient at approximately the same intervals). Example:
So far I have been working through the data graphically but realize that since the amount of the data is so large plotting each time I want to check how two sets correlate graphically it will take far too much time.
Are there any ideas, scripts or functions that might be useful in order to automize this process somewhat?
The first thing you have to think about is the nature of the criteria you want to apply to establish the similarity. There is a wide variety of ways to measure similarity and the more precisely you can describe what you want for "similar" to mean in your problem the easiest it will be to implement it regardless of the programming language.
Having said that, here is some of the thing you could look at :
correlation of the two datasets
difference of the derivative of the datasets (but I don't think it would be robust enough)
spectral analysis as mentionned by #thron of three
etc. ...
Knowing the origin of the datasets and their variability can also help a lot in formulating robust enough algorithms.
Sure. Call your two vectors A and B.
1) (Optional) Smooth your data either with a simple averaging filter (Matlab 'smooth'), or the 'filter' command. This will get rid of local changes in velocity ("gradient") that appear to be essentially noise (as in the ascending component of the red trace.
2) Differentiate both A and B. Now you are directly representing the velocity of each vector (Matlab 'diff').
3) Add the two differentiated vectors together (element-wise). Call this C.
4) Look for all points in C whose absolute value is above a certain threshold (you'll have to eyeball the data to get a good idea of what this should be). Points above this threshold indicate highly similar velocity.
5) Now look for where a high positive value in C is followed by a high negative value, or vice versa. In between these two points you will have similar curves in A and B.
Note: a) You could do the smoothing after step 3 rather than after step 1. b) Re 5), you could have a situation in which a 'hill' in your data is at the edge of the vector and so is 'cut in half', and the vectors descend to baseline before ascending in the next hill. Then 5) would misidentify the hill as coming between the initial descent and subsequent ascent. To avoid this, you could also require that the points in A and B in between the two points of velocity similarity have high absolute values.