Lets say, I have a function 'x' and a function '2sin(x)'
How do I output the intersects, i.e. the roots in MATLAB? I can easily plot the two functions and find them that way but surely there must exist an absolute way of doing this.
If you have two analytical (by which I mean symbolic) functions, you can define their difference and use fzero to find a zero, i.e. the root:
f = #(x) x; %defines a function f(x)
g = #(x) 2*sin(x); %defines a function g(x)
%solve f==g
xroot = fzero(#(x)f(x)-g(x),0.5); %starts search from x==0.5
For tricky functions you might have to set a good starting point, and it will only find one solution even if there are multiple ones.
The constructs seen above #(x) something-with-x are called anonymous functions, and they can be extended to multivariate cases as well, like #(x,y) 3*x.*y+c assuming that c is a variable that has been assigned a value earlier.
When writing the comments, I thought that
syms x; solve(x==2*sin(x))
would return the expected result. At least in Matlab 2013b solve fails to find a analytic solution for this problem, falling back to a numeric solver only returning one solution, 0.
An alternative is
s = feval(symengine,'numeric::solve',2*sin(x)==x,x,'AllRealRoots')
which is taken from this answer to a similar question. Besides using AllRealRoots you could use a numeric solver, manually setting starting points which roughly match the values you have read from the graph. This wa you get precise results:
[fzero(#(x)f(x)-g(x),-2),fzero(#(x)f(x)-g(x),0),fzero(#(x)f(x)-g(x),2)]
For a higher precision you could switch from fzero to vpasolve, but fzero is probably sufficient and faster.
Related
I want to minimize a function like below:
Here, n can be 5,10,50 etc. I want to use Matlab and want to use Gradient Descent and Quasi-Newton Method with BFGS update to solve this problem along with backtracking line search. I am a novice in Matlab. Can anyone help, please? I can find a solution for a similar problem in that link: https://www.mathworks.com/help/optim/ug/unconstrained-nonlinear-optimization-algorithms.html .
But, I really don't know how to create a vector-valued function in Matlab (in my case input x can be an n-dimensional vector).
You will have to make quite a leap to get where you want to be -- may I suggest to go through some basic tutorial first in order to digest basic MATLAB syntax and concepts? Another useful read is the very basic example to unconstrained optimization in the documentation. However, the answer to your question touches only basic syntax, so we can go through it quickly nevertheless.
The absolute minimum to invoke the unconstraint nonlinear optimization algorithms of the Optimization Toolbox is the formulation of an objective function. That function is supposed to return the function value f of your function at any given point x, and in your case it reads
function f = objfun(x)
f = sum(100 * (x(2:end) - x(1:end-1).^2).^2 + (1 - x(1:end-1)).^2);
end
Notice that
we select the indiviual components of the x vector by matrix indexing, and that
the .^ notation effects that the operand is to be squared elementwise.
For simplicity, save this function to a file objfun.m in your current working directory, so that you have it available from the command window.
Now all you have to do is to call the appropriate optimization algorithm, say, the quasi Newton method, from the command window:
n = 10; % Use n variables
options = optimoptions(#fminunc,'Algorithm','quasi-newton'); % Use QM method
x0 = rand(n,1); % Random starting guess
[x,fval,exitflag] = fminunc(#objfun, x0, options); % Solve!
fprintf('Final objval=%.2e, exitflag=%d\n', fval, exitflag);
On my machine I see that the algorithm converges:
Local minimum found.
Optimization completed because the size of the gradient is less than
the default value of the optimality tolerance.
Final objval=5.57e-11, exitflag=1
I have a system of equations...
dF(a,b,c)/da = 0;
dF(a,b,c)/db = 0;
dF(a,b,c)/dc = 0;
where a,b,c are unknown variable constants and dF/d* are anonymous functions of the variables. I have to solve for a,b and c in an optimization problem. When the system reduces to just one equation, I use Matlab's fzero to solve for the variable and it works. For example
var_a = fzero(#(a) dF(a)/da,0);
After noticing that fzero and fsolve give dramatically different answers for some cases I did some searching. From what I gather, fzero only works for a single equation of a single variable? So moving to a system of equations, I'd like to choose the most appropriate method. I've used Matlab's solve in the past, but I believe that is for symbolic expressions only? What is the best method for solving a linear system of anonymous functions, which all equal zero?
I tried the following, and got back results
vars = fsolve(#(V)[dF(V)/da;dF(V)/db;dF(V)/dc],zeros(1,3));
where vars contains all 3 variables, but after reading the examples in the previous link, Fsolve couldn't exactly find the zeros for x^2 and x^3. The solution vector in the system I presented above is all zeros and the functions are polynomials. Putting this all together, I'm wondering if fsolve isn't the best choice?
Can I build a system of calls to fzero? Something along the lines of
vars = [fzero(#(a) dF(a,b,c)/da,0);
fzero(#(b) dF(a,b,c)/db,0);
fzero(#(c) dF(a,b,c)/dc,0)];
which I don't think would work (how would each dF/d* get the other 2 variable inputs?) or would it?
Any thoughts?
You can numerically solve to minimize any function using 'lsqnonlin'. To adopt this for a system of equations, simply turn them into a single function with a vector input. Something like this:
fToMinimize = #(abc) ...
(dF(ABC(1),ABC(2),ABC(3))/da)^2 +...
(dF(ABC(1),ABC(2),ABC(3))/db)^2 +...
(dF(ABC(1),ABC(2),ABC(3))/dc)^2 ;
abcSolved = lsqnonlin(fToMinimize, [0 0 0])
If you have a guess for the values of a, b, and c, you can (and should) use those instead of the [0 0 0] vector. There are also many options within the lsqnonlin function to adjust behavior. For example how close to the best answer you want to get. If the functions are well behaved, you should be able to tighten the tolerance down a lot, if you are looking for a near exact answer.
Firstly, I'm sure a simple answer exists for this, maybe I'm just not wording it right in searching for an answer online.
I'm trying to solve an equation that looks like this:
a*x*cot(a*x) == b
Where a and b are constants. Using
solve(a*x*cot(a*x) == b, x)
I'm getting a result I know is wrong (with the values I'm using for the constants, I'm getting like -227, and it should be something around +160.) I plotted it up in Mathematica as two separate functions, and they do cross each other right around there, but since the cot part is periodic, they do so many times.
I want to constrain Matlab's search for the solution to a specific interval, such as 0 to 200; how do I do that?
I'm pretty new to Matlab (rather more experienced in Mathematica).
You can specify the bounds on x using fzero with only two requirements
The function must be in a "residual" form (i.e., r(x) = 0)
The residual values at the two bounds must have opposite sign (this guarantees that a root exists within the interval for continuous functions).
So we re-write the function in residual form:
r = #(x) a*x*cot(a*x) - b;
define the interval
% These are just random numbers; the actual bounds should come
% from the graph the ensures r has different signs a xL and xR
xL = 150;
xR = 170;
and solve
x = fzero(r,[xL,xR]);
I see you were trying to use the Symbolic Toolbox for a solution, but since the equation is a non-linear combination of a polynomial and a trigonometric function, there is more than likely no closed form solution. So I differed to a non-linear, numeric root-finder.
I tried some values and it seems solve returns a numeric solution. This is the documented behaviour if no analytic solution is found.
In this case, you may directly call the numeric solver with a matching start value
vpasolve(a*x*cot(a*x) == b, x,160)
It's not exactly what you asked for, but using your reading from the plot as a start value should do it.
I have been working on solving some equation in a more complicated context. However, I want to illustrate my question through the following simple example.
Consider the following two functions:
function y=f1(x)
y=1-x;
end
function y=f2(x)
if x<0
y=0;
else
y=x;
end
end
I want to solve the following equation: f1(x)=f2(x). The code I used is:
syms x;
x=solve(f1(x)-f2(x));
And I got the following error:
??? Error using ==> sym.sym>notimplemented at 2621
Function 'lt' is not implemented for MuPAD symbolic objects.
Error in ==> sym.sym>sym.lt at 812
notimplemented('lt');
Error in ==> f2 at 3
if x<0
I know the error is because x is a symbolic variable and therefore I could not compare x with 0 in the piecewise function f2(x).
Is there a way to fix this and solve the equation?
First, make sure symbolic math is even the appropriate solution method for your problem. In many cases it isn't. Look at fzero and fsolve amongst many others. A symbolic method is only needed if, for example, you want a formula or if you need to ensure precision.
In such an old version of Matlab, you may want to break up your piecewise function into separate continuous functions and solve them separately:
syms x;
s1 = solve(1-x^2,x) % For x >= 0
s2 = solve(1-x,x) % For x < 0
Then you can either manually examine or numerically compare the outputs to determine if any or all of the solutions are valid for the chosen regime – something like this:
s = [s1(double(s1) >= 0);s2(double(s2) < 0)]
You can also take advantage of the heaviside function, which is available in much older versions.
syms x;
f1 = 1-x;
f2 = x*heaviside(x);
s = solve(f1-f2,x)
Yes, the Heaviside function is 0.5 at zero – this gives it the appropriate mathematical properties. You can shift it to compare values other than zero. This is a standard technique.
In Matlab R2012a+, you can take advantage of assumptions in addition to the normal relational operators. To add to #AlexB's comment, you should convert the output of any logical comparison to symbolic before using isAlways:
isAlways(sym(x<0))
In your case, x is obviously not "always" on one side or the other of zero, but you may still find this useful in other cases.
If you want to get deep into Matlab's symbolic math, you can create piecewise functions using MuPAD, which are accessible from Matlab – e.g., see my example here.
Is it possible to use vector limits for any matlab function of integration? I have to avoid from for loops because of the speed of my program. Can you please give me a clue on do
k=0:5
f=#(x)x^2
quad(f,k,k+1)
If somebody need, I found the answer of my question:quad with vector limit
I will try giving you an answer, based on my experience with quad function.
Starting from this:
k=0:5;
f=#(x) x.^2;
Notice the difference in your f definition (incorrect) and mine (correct).
If you only mean to integrate f within the range (0,5) you can easily call
quad(f,k(1),k(end))
Without handle function, you may reach the same results in a different way, by making use of trapz:
x = 0:5;
y = x.^2;
trapz(x,y)
If, instead, you mean to perform a step-by-step integration in the small range [k(i),k(i+1)] you may type
arrayfun(#(ii) quad(f,k(ii),k(ii+1)),1:numel(k)-1)
For a sake of convenince, notice that
sum(arrayfun(#(ii) quad(f,k(ii),k(ii+1)),1:numel(k)-1)) == quad(f,k(1),k(end))
I hope this helps.