Matlab - How can I get the expression of the level curves of a function? - matlab

I would like to obtain the level curves of a given function z=f(x,y) without using the countours function in the Matlab environment.
By letting Z equal to some constant 'c' we get a single level curve. I would like to obtain an expression of the resulting function of the form y=f(x) to be able to study other properties of it.
Basic: Example 1: Easy game
Let's consider the problem of plotting level curves of z=-x^2-y^2+100 for x,y:-10;10 and z=1.
[X,Y] = meshgrid(-10:.1:10);
Z = -X.^2+-(Y).^2+100;
surf(X,Y,Z)
we obtain the following figure:
The countour function gives me what I was looking for:
h=[1,1]
contour(X,Y,Z,h)
I can get the same result by solving the equation with respect to x
syms x y;
soly = solve(1==-x.^2-y^2+100, y)
t=soly(1)
x=-10:0.1:10;
figure;
plot(x,(99-x.^2).^(1/2));
hold on
plot(x,-(99-x.^2).^(1/2));
soly =
(99 - x^2)^(1/2)
-(99 - x^2)^(1/2)
The Problem: Example 2
Let's consider the following 3D function.
This function is the sum of guassians with random centers, variances and peaks. You can get it with the following code:
%% Random Radial Basis functions in space
disp('3D case with random path - 10 rbf:');
N = 10 % number of random functions
stepMesh = 0.1;
Z = zeros((XMax-XMin)/stepMesh+1,(XMax-XMin)/stepMesh+1);
[X,Y] = meshgrid(XMin:stepMesh:XMax);
% random variance in [a;b] = [0.3;1.5]
variances = 0.3 + (1.5-0.3).*rand(N,1);
% random amplitude [0.1;1]
amplitudes = 0.1 + (1-0.1).*rand(N,1);
% Random Xcenters in [-XMin;xMax]
Xcenters = XMin+ (XMax-XMin).*rand(N,1);
Ycenters = YMin+ (YMax-YMin).*rand(N,1);
esp=zeros(N,1);
esp=1./(2*(variances).^2);
for i=1:1:N
disp('step:')
disp(i)
Xci=Xcenters(i,1)*ones((XMax-XMin)/stepMesh+1,((XMax-XMin)/stepMesh+1)*2);
Yci=Ycenters(i,1)*ones((YMax-YMin)/stepMesh+1,((YMax-YMin)/stepMesh+1)*2);
disp('Radial Basis Function: [amplitude,variance,center]');
disp(amplitudes(i,1))
disp(variances(i,1))
disp(Xcenters(i,1))
disp(Ycenters(i,1))
Z = Z + 1*exp(-((X-Xci(:,1:((XMax-XMin)/stepMesh+1))).^2+(Y-Yci(:,((XMax-XMin)/stepMesh+2):((YMax-YMin)/stepMesh+1)*2)).^2)*esp(i,1).^2);
end
surf(X,Y,Z)
The countour3 function draws a contour plot of matrix Z in a 3-D view, which is really nice, but it doesn't give me the expression of these functions in 2D.
figure;
contour3(X,Y,Z);
grid on
box on
view([130,30])
xlabel('x-axis')
ylabel('y-axis')
zlabel('z-axis')
The Question:
How can I get an explicit expression of the level curves of the second example?

Related

Potential flow, define theta in matlab

I have made this matlab script for a potential flow around a cylinder and I would like to add a point source. See the definition of point source in picture. How can you define theta in matlab? And plot this its streamlines Psi?
clear
% make axes
xymax = 2;
x = linspace(-xymax,xymax,100);
y = linspace(-xymax,xymax,100);
% note that x and y don't include 0
[xmesh,ymesh] = meshgrid(x,y);
x_c=0;
y_c=0;
q=1;
U=1
r = sqrt((xmesh-x_c).^2+(ymesh-y_c).^2);
sin_th= ((ymesh-y_c)./r)
%(ymesh-y_c)./r = sin(teta)
%(xmesh-x_c)./r = cos(teta)
psi1 = -q./r.*((ymesh-y_c)./r);
psi2 = r.*sin_th;
psi=psi1+psi2;
figure
contour(xmesh,ymesh,psi,[-xymax:.25:xymax],'-b');
To plot the streamlines in potential flow you are correct that you have to plot contour lines of constant stream function.
In the case of a point source, if you are plotting in cartesian coordinates in MATLAB you have to convert theta to cartesian coordinates using arctangent as follows: theta = arctan(y/x). In MATLAB use the function atan2 which will limit the number of discontinuities to between -PI and PI: https://www.mathworks.com/help/matlab/ref/atan2.html
Your code should read: psi2 = ( m/(2*PI) ) * atan2(y,x)
For more information on plotting elements of potential flow in 2D cartesian coordinates, see more information here:
https://potentialflow.com/flow-elements
https://potentialflow.com/equations

Draw a line with non-Cartesian coordinates in MATLAB

MATLAB's surf command allows you to pass it optional X and Y data that specify non-cartesian x-y components. (they essentially change the basis vectors). I desire to pass similar arguments to a function that will draw a line.
How do I plot a line using a non-cartesian coordinate system?
My apologies if my terminology is a little off. This still might technically be a cartesian space but it wouldn't be square in the sense that one unit in the x-direction is orthogonal to one unit in the y-direction. If you can correct my terminology, I would really appreciate it!
EDIT:
Below better demonstrates what I mean:
The commands:
datA=1:10;
datB=1:10;
X=cosd(8*datA)'*datB;
Y=datA'*log10(datB*3);
Z=ones(size(datA'))*cosd(datB);
XX=X./(1+Z);
YY=Y./(1+Z);
surf(XX,YY,eye(10)); view([0 0 1])
produces the following graph:
Here, the X and Y dimensions are not orthogonal nor equi-spaced. One unit in x could correspond to 5 cm in the x direction but the next one unit in x could correspond to 2 cm in the x direction + 1 cm in the y direction. I desire to replicate this functionality but drawing a line instead of a surf For instance, I'm looking for a function where:
straightLine=[(1:10)' (1:10)'];
my_line(XX,YY,straightLine(:,1),straightLine(:,2))
would produce a line that traced the red squares on the surf graph.
I'm still not certain of what your input data are about, and what you want to plot. However, from how you want to plot it, I can help.
When you call
surf(XX,YY,eye(10)); view([0 0 1]);
and want to get only the "red parts", i.e. the maxima of the function, you are essentially selecting a subset of the XX, YY matrices using the diagonal matrix as indicator. So you could select those points manually, and use plot to plot them as a line:
Xplot = diag(XX);
Yplot = diag(YY);
plot(Xplot,Yplot,'r.-');
The call to diag(XX) will take the diagonal elements of the matrix XX, which is exactly where you'll get the red patches when you use surf with the z data according to eye().
Result:
Also, if you're just trying to do what your example states, then there's no need to use matrices just to take out the diagonal eventually. Here's the same result, using elementwise operations on your input vectors:
datA = 1:10;
datB = 1:10;
X2 = cosd(8*datA).*datB;
Y2 = datA.*log10(datB*3);
Z2 = cosd(datB);
XX2 = X2./(1+Z2);
YY2 = Y2./(1+Z2);
plot(Xplot,Yplot,'rs-',XX2,YY2,'bo--','linewidth',2,'markersize',10);
legend('original','vector')
Result:
Matlab has many built-in function to assist you.
In 2D the easiest way to do this is polar that allows you to make a graph using theta and rho vectors:
theta = linspace(0,2*pi,100);
r = sin(2*theta);
figure(1)
polar(theta, r), grid on
So, you would get this.
There also is pol2cart function that would convert your data into x and y format:
[x,y] = pol2cart(theta,r);
figure(2)
plot(x, y), grid on
This would look slightly different
Then, if we extend this to 3D, you are only left with plot3. So, If you have data like:
theta = linspace(0,10*pi,500);
r = ones(size(theta));
z = linspace(-10,10,500);
you need to use pol2cart with 3 arguments to produce this:
[x,y,z] = pol2cart(theta,r,z);
figure(3)
plot3(x,y,z),grid on
Finally, if you have spherical data, you have sph2cart:
theta = linspace(0,2*pi,100);
phi = linspace(-pi/2,pi/2,100);
rho = sin(2*theta - phi);
[x,y,z] = sph2cart(theta, phi, rho);
figure(4)
plot3(x,y,z),grid on
view([-150 70])
That would look this way

Dom::Interval function in Matlab Error

I am trying to plot f(x)=sin(x) in Matlab, but am having trouble defining my variable x as the interval [0,pi/2]. I have:
x1 = Dom::Interval([0], [1])
y1 = cos(x1)
plot(x1,y1)
However, the interval function in Matlab returns as an unexpected Matlab operator.
Dom::Interval is part of the MuPad interface. Simply create a numeric array from 0 to pi/2 and plot the sin of the result.
x1 = linspace(0, pi/2);
y1 = sin(x);
plot(x1, y1);
linspace generates a numeric array with a default amount of 100 points linearly spaced from 0 to pi/2. You can override the amount of points by specifying a third element... something like:
x1 = linspace(0, pi/2, 300);
This creates 300 points. Play around with the third parameter. The more points you have, the more smooth the plot will be as the default method of plotting things in MATLAB is to just join the points together with straight lines.

Symbolic gradient differing wildly from analytic gradient

I am trying to simulate a network of mobile robots that uses artificial potential fields for movement planning to a shared destination xd. This is done by generating a series of m-files (one for each robot) from a symbolic expression, as this seems to be the best way in terms of computational time and accuracy. However, I can't figure out what is going wrong with my gradient computation: the analytical gradient that is being computed seems to be faulty, while the numerical gradient is calculated correctly (see the image posted below). I have written a MWE listed below, which also exhibits this problem. I have checked the file generating part of the code, and it does return a correct function file with a correct gradient. But I can't figure out why the analytic and numerical gradient are so different.
(A larger version of the image below can be found here)
% create symbolic variables
xd = sym('xd',[1 2]);
x = sym('x',[2 2]);
% create a potential function and a gradient function for both (x,y) pairs
% in x
for i=1:size(x,1)
phi = norm(x(i,:)-xd)/norm(x(1,:)-x(2,:)); % potential field function
xvector = reshape(x.',1,size(x,1)*size(x,2)); % reshape x to allow for gradient computation
grad = gradient(phi,xvector(2*i-1:2*i)); % compute the gradient
gradx = grad(1);grady=grad(2); % split the gradient in two components
% create function file names
gradfun = strcat('GradTester',int2str(i),'.m');
phifun = strcat('PotTester',int2str(i),'.m');
% generate two output files
matlabFunction(gradx, grady,'file',gradfun,'outputs',{'gradx','grady'},'vars',{xvector, xd});
matlabFunction(phi,'file',phifun,'vars',{xvector, xd});
end
clear all % make sure the workspace is empty: the functions are in the files
pause(0.1) % ensure the function file has been generated before it is called
% these are later overwritten by a specific case, but they can be used for
% debugging
x = 0.5*rand(2);
xd = 0.5*rand(1,2);
% values for the Stackoverflow case
x = [0.0533 0.0023;
0.4809 0.3875];
xd = [0.4087 0.4343];
xp = x; % dummy variable to keep x intact
% compute potential field and gradient for both (x,y) pairs
for i=1:size(x,1)
% create a grid centered on the selected (x,y) pair
xGrid = (x(i,1)-0.1):0.005:(x(i,1)+0.1);
yGrid = (x(i,2)-0.1):0.005:(x(i,2)+0.1);
% preallocate the gradient and potential matrices
gradx = zeros(length(xGrid),length(yGrid));
grady = zeros(length(xGrid),length(yGrid));
phi = zeros(length(xGrid),length(yGrid));
% generate appropriate function handles
fun = str2func(strcat('GradTester',int2str(i)));
fun2 = str2func(strcat('PotTester',int2str(i)));
% compute analytic gradient and potential for each position in the xGrid and
% yGrid vectors
for ii = 1:length(yGrid)
for jj = 1:length(xGrid)
xp(i,:) = [xGrid(ii) yGrid(jj)]; % select the position
Xvec = reshape(xp.',1,size(x,1)*size(x,2)); % turn the input into a vector
[gradx(ii,jj),grady(ii,jj)] = fun(Xvec,xd); % compute gradients
phi(jj,ii) = fun2(Xvec,xd); % compute potential value
end
end
[FX,FY] = gradient(phi); % compute the NUMERICAL gradient for comparison
%scale the numerical gradient
FX = FX/0.005;
FY = FY/0.005;
% plot analytic result
subplot(2,2,2*i-1)
hold all
xlim([xGrid(1) xGrid(end)]);
ylim([yGrid(1) yGrid(end)]);
quiver(xGrid,yGrid,-gradx,-grady)
contour(xGrid,yGrid,phi)
title(strcat('Analytic result for position ',int2str(i)));
xlabel('x');
ylabel('y');
subplot(2,2,2*i)
hold all
xlim([xGrid(1) xGrid(end)]);
ylim([yGrid(1) yGrid(end)]);
quiver(xGrid,yGrid,-FX,-FY)
contour(xGrid,yGrid,phi)
title(strcat('Numerical result for position ',int2str(i)));
xlabel('x');
ylabel('y');
end
The potential field I am trying to generate is defined by an (x,y) position, in my code called xd. x is the position matrix of dimension N x 2, where the first column represents x1, x2, and so on, and the second column represents y1, y2, and so on. Xvec is simply a reshaping of this vector to x1,y1,x2,y2,x3,y3 and so on, as the matlabfunction I am generating only accepts vector inputs.
The gradient for robot i is being calculated by taking the derivative w.r.t. x_i and y_i, these two components together yield a single derivative 'vector' shown in the quiver plots. The derivative should look like this, and I checked that the symbolic expression for [gradx,grady] indeed looks like that before an m-file is generated.
To fix the particular problem given in the question, you were actually calculating phi in such a way that meant you doing gradient(phi) was not giving the correct results compared to the symbolic gradient. I'll try and explain. Here is how you created xGrid and yGrid:
% create a grid centered on the selected (x,y) pair
xGrid = (x(i,1)-0.1):0.005:(x(i,1)+0.1);
yGrid = (x(i,2)-0.1):0.005:(x(i,2)+0.1);
But then in the for loop, ii and jj were used like phi(jj,ii) or gradx(ii,jj), but corresponding to the same physical position. This is why your results were different. Another problem you had was you used gradient incorrectly. Matlab assumes that [FX,FY]=gradient(phi) means that phi is calculated from phi=f(x,y) where x and y are matrices created using meshgrid. You effectively had the elements of phi arranged differently to that, an so gradient(phi) gave the wrong answer. Between reversing the jj and ii, and the incorrect gradient, the errors cancelled out (I suspect you tried doing phi(jj,ii) after trying phi(ii,jj) first and finding it didn't work).
Anyway, to sort it all out, on the line after you create xGrid and yGrid, put this in:
[X,Y]=meshgrid(xGrid,yGrid);
Then change the code after you load fun and fun2 to:
for ii = 1:length(xGrid) %// x loop
for jj = 1:length(yGrid) %// y loop
xp(i,:) = [X(ii,jj);Y(ii,jj)]; %// using X and Y not xGrid and yGrid
Xvec = reshape(xp.',1,size(x,1)*size(x,2));
[gradx(ii,jj),grady(ii,jj)] = fun(Xvec,xd);
phi(ii,jj) = fun2(Xvec,xd);
end
end
[FX,FY] = gradient(phi,0.005); %// use the second argument of gradient to set spacing
subplot(2,2,2*i-1)
hold all
axis([min(X(:)) max(X(:)) min(Y(:)) max(Y(:))]) %// use axis rather than xlim/ylim
quiver(X,Y,gradx,grady)
contour(X,Y,phi)
title(strcat('Analytic result for position ',int2str(i)));
xlabel('x');
ylabel('y');
subplot(2,2,2*i)
hold all
axis([min(X(:)) max(X(:)) min(Y(:)) max(Y(:))])
quiver(X,Y,FX,FY)
contour(X,Y,phi)
title(strcat('Numerical result for position ',int2str(i)));
xlabel('x');
ylabel('y');
I have some other comments about your code. I think your potential function is ill-defined, which is causing all sorts of problems. You say in the question that x is an Nx2 matrix, but you potential function is defined as
norm(x(i,:)-xd)/norm(x(1,:)-x(2,:));
which means if N was three, you'd have the following three potentials:
norm(x(1,:)-xd)/norm(x(1,:)-x(2,:));
norm(x(2,:)-xd)/norm(x(1,:)-x(2,:));
norm(x(3,:)-xd)/norm(x(1,:)-x(2,:));
and I don't think the third one makes sense. I think this could be causing some confusion with the gradients.
Also, I'm not sure if there is a reason to create the .m file functions in your real code, but they are not necessary for the code you posted.

How to fit a curve by a series of segmented lines in Matlab?

I have a simple loglog curve as above. Is there some function in Matlab which can fit this curve by segmented lines and show the starting and end points of these line segments ? I have checked the curve fitting toolbox in matlab. They seems to do curve fitting by either one line or some functions. I do not want to curve fitting by one line only.
If there is no direct function, any alternative to achieve the same goal is fine with me. My goal is to fit the curve by segmented lines and get locations of the end points of these segments .
First of all, your problem is not called curve fitting. Curve fitting is when you have data, and you find the best function that describes it, in some sense. You, on the other hand, want to create a piecewise linear approximation of your function.
I suggest the following strategy:
Split manually into sections. The section size should depend on the derivative, large derivative -> small section
Sample the function at the nodes between the sections
Find a linear interpolation that passes through the points mentioned above.
Here is an example of a code that does that. You can see that the red line (interpolation) is very close to the original function, despite the small amount of sections. This happens due to the adaptive section size.
function fitLogLog()
x = 2:1000;
y = log(log(x));
%# Find section sizes, by using an inverse of the approximation of the derivative
numOfSections = 20;
indexes = round(linspace(1,numel(y),numOfSections));
derivativeApprox = diff(y(indexes));
inverseDerivative = 1./derivativeApprox;
weightOfSection = inverseDerivative/sum(inverseDerivative);
totalRange = max(x(:))-min(x(:));
sectionSize = weightOfSection.* totalRange;
%# The relevant nodes
xNodes = x(1) + [ 0 cumsum(sectionSize)];
yNodes = log(log(xNodes));
figure;plot(x,y);
hold on;
plot (xNodes,yNodes,'r');
scatter (xNodes,yNodes,'r');
legend('log(log(x))','adaptive linear interpolation');
end
Andrey's adaptive solution provides a more accurate overall fit. If what you want is segments of a fixed length, however, then here is something that should work, using a method that also returns a complete set of all the fitted values. Could be vectorized if speed is needed.
Nsamp = 1000; %number of data samples on x-axis
x = [1:Nsamp]; %this is your x-axis
Nlines = 5; %number of lines to fit
fx = exp(-10*x/Nsamp); %generate something like your current data, f(x)
gx = NaN(size(fx)); %this will hold your fitted lines, g(x)
joins = round(linspace(1, Nsamp, Nlines+1)); %define equally spaced breaks along the x-axis
dx = diff(x(joins)); %x-change
df = diff(fx(joins)); %f(x)-change
m = df./dx; %gradient for each section
for i = 1:Nlines
x1 = joins(i); %start point
x2 = joins(i+1); %end point
gx(x1:x2) = fx(x1) + m(i)*(0:dx(i)); %compute line segment
end
subplot(2,1,1)
h(1,:) = plot(x, fx, 'b', x, gx, 'k', joins, gx(joins), 'ro');
title('Normal Plot')
subplot(2,1,2)
h(2,:) = loglog(x, fx, 'b', x, gx, 'k', joins, gx(joins), 'ro');
title('Log Log Plot')
for ip = 1:2
subplot(2,1,ip)
set(h(ip,:), 'LineWidth', 2)
legend('Data', 'Piecewise Linear', 'Location', 'NorthEastOutside')
legend boxoff
end
This is not an exact answer to this question, but since I arrived here based on a search, I'd like to answer the related question of how to create (not fit) a piecewise linear function that is intended to represent the mean (or median, or some other other function) of interval data in a scatter plot.
First, a related but more sophisticated alternative using regression, which apparently has some MATLAB code listed on the wikipedia page, is Multivariate adaptive regression splines.
The solution here is to just calculate the mean on overlapping intervals to get points
function [x, y] = intervalAggregate(Xdata, Ydata, aggFun, intStep, intOverlap)
% intOverlap in [0, 1); 0 for no overlap of intervals, etc.
% intStep this is the size of the interval being aggregated.
minX = min(Xdata);
maxX = max(Xdata);
minY = min(Ydata);
maxY = max(Ydata);
intInc = intOverlap*intStep; %How far we advance each iteraction.
if intOverlap <= 0
intInc = intStep;
end
nInt = ceil((maxX-minX)/intInc); %Number of aggregations
parfor i = 1:nInt
xStart = minX + (i-1)*intInc;
xEnd = xStart + intStep;
intervalIndices = find((Xdata >= xStart) & (Xdata <= xEnd));
x(i) = aggFun(Xdata(intervalIndices));
y(i) = aggFun(Ydata(intervalIndices));
end
For instance, to calculate the mean over some paired X and Y data I had handy with intervals of length 0.1 having roughly 1/3 overlap with each other (see scatter image):
[x,y] = intervalAggregate(Xdat, Ydat, #mean, 0.1, 0.333)
x =
Columns 1 through 8
0.0552 0.0868 0.1170 0.1475 0.1844 0.2173 0.2498 0.2834
Columns 9 through 15
0.3182 0.3561 0.3875 0.4178 0.4494 0.4671 0.4822
y =
Columns 1 through 8
0.9992 0.9983 0.9971 0.9955 0.9927 0.9905 0.9876 0.9846
Columns 9 through 15
0.9803 0.9750 0.9707 0.9653 0.9598 0.9560 0.9537
We see that as x increases, y tends to decrease slightly. From there, it is easy enough to draw line segments and/or perform some other kind of smoothing.
(Note that I did not attempt to vectorize this solution; a much faster version could be assumed if Xdata is sorted.)