I am working on 2D rectangular packing. In order to minimize the length of the infinite sheet (Width is constant) by changing the order in which parts are placed. For example, we could place 11 parts in 11! ways.
I could label those parts and save all possible permutations using perms function and run it one by one, but I need a large amount of memory even for 11 parts. I'd like to be able to do it for around 1000 parts.
Luckily, I don't need every possible sequence. I would like to index each permutation to a number. Test a random sequence and then use GA to converge the results to find the optimal sequence.
Therefore, I need a function which gives a specific permutation value when run for any number of times unlike randperm function.
For example, function(5,6) should always return say [1 4 3 2 5 6] for 6 parts. I don't need the sequences in a specific order, but the function should give the same sequence for same index. and also for some other index, the sequence should not be same as this one.
So far, I have used randperm function to generate random sequence for around 2000 iterations and finding a best sequence out of it by comparing length, but this works only for few number of parts. Also using randperm may result in repeated sequence instead of unique sequence.
Here's a picture of what I have done.
I can't save the outputs of randperm because I won't have a searchable function space. I don't want to find the length of the sheet for all sequences. I only need do it for certain sequence identified by certain index determined by genetic algorithm. If I use randperm, I won't have the sequence for all indexes (even though I only need some of them).
For example, take some function, 'y = f(x)', in the range [0,10] say. For each value of x, I get a y. Here y is my sheet length. x is the index of permutation. For any x, I find its sequence (the specific permutation) and then its corresponding sheet length. Based on the results of some random values of x, GA will generate me a new list of x to find a more optimal y.
I need a function that duplicates perms, (I guess perms are following the same order of permutations each time it is run because perms(1:4) will yield same results when run any number of times) without actually storing the values.
Is there a way to write the function? If not, then how do i solve my problem?
Edit (how i approached the problem):
In Genetic Algorithm, you need to crossover parents(permutations), But if you crossover permutations, you will get the numbers repeated. for eg:- crossing over 1 2 3 4 with 3 2 1 4 may result something like 3 2 3 4. Therefore, to avoid repetition, i thought of indexing each parent to a number and then convert the number to binary form and then crossover the binary indices to get a new binary number then convert it back to decimal and find its specific permutation. But then later on, i discovered i could just use ordered crossover of the permutations itself instead of crossing over their indices.
More details on Ordered Crossover could be found here
Below are two functions that together will generate permutations in lexographical order and return the nth permutation
For example, I can call
nth_permutation(5, [1 2 3 4])
And the output will be [1 4 2 3]
Intuitively, how long this method takes is linear in n. The size of the set doesn't matter. I benchmarked nth_permutations(n, 1:1000) averaged over 100 iterations and got the following graph
So timewise it seems okay.
function [permutation] = nth_permutation(n, set)
%%NTH_PERMUTATION Generates n permutations of set in lexographical order and
%%outputs the last one
%% set is a 1 by m matrix
set = sort(set);
permutation = set; %First permutation
for ii=2:n
permutation = next_permute(permutation);
end
end
function [p] = next_permute(p)
%Following algorithm from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permutation#Generation_in_lexicographic_order
%Find the largest index k such that p[k] < p[k+1]
larger = p(1:end-1) < p(2:end);
k = max(find(larger));
%If no such index exists, the permutation is the last permutation.
if isempty(k)
display('Last permutation reached');
return
end
%Find the largest index l greater than k such that p[k] < p[l].
larger = [false(1, k) p(k+1:end) > p(k)];
l = max(find(larger));
%Swap the value of p[k] with that of p[l].
p([k, l]) = p([l, k]);
%Reverse the sequence from p[k + 1] up to and including the final element p[n].
p(k+1:end) = p(end:-1:k+1);
end
Related
I am trying to figure out how to split a vector in matlab into subvectors.
I am solving a differential equation numerically using dde23. When You do this the length of the solution vector changes. Thus, I am finding it not so easy to use the mat2cell command that many people suggest.
All I am trying to do is split (as evenly as possible) a vector of length N into an arbitrary amount of sub-vectors whose length may vary depending on the length of the time vector. I am doing this so then I can find the maximum value of each vector on in each interval.
If I understand the question, maybe you can try to split it by using code below
dataset=[ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10]
splitpoint = randi[2 length(dataset)-1]
subset1 = dataset(1,1:splitpoint)
splitpoint = randi[length(subset1)+1 length(dataset)-1]
subset2 = dataset(1,length(subset1)+1:splitpoint)
After that you can choose where to finish and accept rest of it for last subset or you can define one list to hold each subset in the row of the list. So you can define while loop to handle it automatically by defining stop_criteria.
I have a 5-by-200 matrix where the i:50:200, i=1:50 are related to each other, so for example the matrix columns 1,51,101,151 are related to each other, and columns 49,99,149,199 are also related to each other.
I want to use a for-loop to create another matrix that re-sorts the previous matrix based on this relationship.
My code is
values=zeros(5,200);
for j=1:50
for m=1:4:200
a=factor_mat(:,j:50:200)
values(:,m)=a
end
end
However, the code does not work.
Here's what's happening. Let's say we're on the first iteration of the outer loop, so j == 1. This effectively gives you:
j = 1;
for m=1:4:200
a=factor_mat(:,j:50:200)
values(:,m)=a;
end
So you're creating the same submatrix for a (j doesn't change) 50 times and storing it at different places in the values matrix. This isn't really what you want to do.
To create each 4-column submatrix once and store them in 50 different places, you need to use j to tell you which of the 50 you're currently processing:
for j=1:50
a=factor_mat(:,j:50:200);
m=j*4; %// This gives us the **end** of the current range
values(:,m-3:m)=a;
end
I've used a little trick here, because the indices of Matlab arrays start at 1 rather than 0. I've calculated the index of the last column we want to insert. For the first group, this is column 4. Since j == 1, j * 4 == 4. Then I subtract 3 to find the first column index.
That will fix the problem you have with your loops. But loops aren't very Matlab-ish. They used to be very slow; now they're adequate. But they're still not the cool way to do things.
To do this without loops, you can use reshape and permute:
a=reshape(factor_mat,[],50,4);
b=permute(a,[1,3,2]);
values=reshape(b,[],200);
I'm struggling with one of my matlab assignments. I want to create 10 different models. Each of them is based on the same original array of dimensions 1x100 m_est. Then with for loop I am choosing 5 random values from the original model and want to add the same random value to each of them. The cycle repeats 10 times chosing different values each time and adding different random number. Here is a part of my code:
steps=10;
for s=1:steps
for i=1:1:5
rl(s,i)=m_est(randi(numel(m_est)));
rl_nr(s,i)=find(rl(s,i)==m_est);
a=-1;
b=1;
r(s)=(b-a)*rand(1,1)+a;
end
pert_layers(s,:)=rl(s,:)+r(s);
M=repmat(m_est',s,1);
end
for k=steps
for m=1:1:5
M_pert=M;
M_pert(1:k,rl_nr(k,1:m))=pert_layers(1:k,1:m);
end
end
In matrix M I am storing 10 initial models and want to replace the random numbers with indices from rl_nr matrix into those stored in pert_layers matrix. However, the last loop responsible for assigning values from pert_layers to rl_nr indices does not work properly.
Does anyone know how to solve this?
Best regards
Your code uses a lot of loops and in this particular circumstance, it's quite inefficient. It's better if you actually vectorize your code. As such, let me go through your problem description one point at a time and let's code up each part (if applicable):
I want to create 10 different models. Each of them is based on the same original array of dimensions 1x100 m_est.
I'm interpreting this as you having an array m_est of 100 elements, and with this array, you wish to create 10 different "models", where each model is 5 elements sampled from m_est. rl will store these values from m_est while rl_nr will store the indices / locations of where these values originated from. Also, for each model, you wish to add a random value to every element that is part of this model.
Then with for loop I am choosing 5 random values from the original model and want to add the same random value to each of them.
Instead of doing this with a for loop, generate all of your random indices in one go. Since you have 10 steps, and we wish to sample 5 points per step, you have 10*5 = 50 points in total. As such, why don't you use randperm instead? randperm is exactly what you're looking for, and we can use this to generate unique random indices so that we can ultimately use this to sample from m_est. randperm generates a vector from 1 to N but returns a random permutation of these elements. This way, you only get numbers enumerated from 1 to N exactly once and we will ensure no repeats. As such, simply use randperm to generate 50 elements, then reshape this array into a matrix of size 10 x 5, where the number of rows tells you the number of steps you want, while the number of columns is the total number of points per model. Therefore, do something like this:
num_steps = 10;
num_points_model = 5;
ind = randperm(numel(m_est));
ind = ind(1:num_steps*num_points_model);
rl_nr = reshape(ind, num_steps, num_points_model);
rl = m_est(rl_nr);
The first two lines are pretty straight forward. We are just declaring the total number of steps you want to take, as well as the total number of points per model. Next, what we will do is generate a random permutation of length 100, where elements are enumerated from 1 to 100, but they are in random order. You'll notice that this random vector uses only a value within the range of 1 to 100 exactly once. Because you only want to get 50 points in total, simply subset this vector so that we only get the first 50 random indices generated from randperm. These random indices get stored in ind.
Next, we simply reshape ind into a 10 x 5 matrix to get rl_nr. rl_nr will contain those indices that will be used to select those entries from m_est which is of size 10 x 5. Finally, rl will be a matrix of the same size as rl_nr, but it will contain the actual random values sampled from m_est. These random values correspond to those indices generated from rl_nr.
Now, the final step would be to add the same random number to each model. You can certainly use repmat to replicate a random column vector of 10 elements long, and duplicate them 5 times so that we have 5 columns then add this matrix together with rl.... so something like:
a = -1;
b = 1;
r = (b-a)*rand(num_steps, 1) + a;
r = repmat(r, 1, num_points_model);
M_pert = rl + r;
Now M_pert is the final result you want, where we take each model that is stored in rl and add the same random value to each corresponding model in the matrix. However, if I can suggest something more efficient, I would suggest you use bsxfun instead, which does this replication under the hood. Essentially, the above code would be replaced with:
a = -1;
b = 1;
r = (b-a)*rand(num_steps, 1) + a;
M_pert = bsxfun(#plus, rl, r);
Much easier to read, and less code. M_pert will contain your models in each row, with the same random value added to each particular model.
The cycle repeats 10 times chosing different values each time and adding different random number.
Already done in the above steps.
I hope you didn't find it an imposition to completely rewrite your code so that it's more vectorized, but I think this was a great opportunity to show you some of the more advanced functions that MATLAB has to offer, as well as more efficient ways to generate your random values, rather than looping and generating the values one at a time.
Hopefully this will get you started. Good luck!
I need to select random combinations of k elements from a set of n elements, where n can be fairly large. Given the size of the set, it is not feasible to simply use combnk or nchoosek to generate all possible combinations, and select randomly from those.
Is there an easy way to generate a unique random subset of M of those combinations?
When n is small, the following works:
M = 20; %want to pick M random combinations
n = 10; %number of elements
k = 5; %number of elements in each combination
allCombos = nchoosek([1:n], k); %for large n this is not feasible
numCombos = nchoosek(n,k);
permutationsToUse = randperm(numCombos, M);
randomCombos = allCombos(permutationsToUse, :);
When n is large, this is no longer feasible.
Related Posts
Retrieve a specific permutation without storing all possible permutations in Matlab
How to randomly pick a number of combinations from all the combinations efficiently?
Select a subset of combinations
You can try using randi and generate random combinations of 7 integers from 1 to Nelements and then check that you only have unique combinations:
Nelements=100;
M=10;
combsubset=randi(Nelements,[M 7]);
combsubset=unique(combsubset,'rows');
If you want to get exactly M combinations you can use a loop:
Nelements=100;
M=10;
combsubset=[];
while(size(combsubset,1)<M)
combsubset=[combsubset;randi(Nelements,[M 7])];
combsubset=unique(combsubset,'rows');
end
combsusbet=combsubset(1:M,:);
If you want to reuse this to get other combinations you can pretty much use the same code:
Nelements=100;
Mtotal=20
M=10;
while(size(combsubset,1)<Mtotal)
combsubset=[combsubset;randi(Nelements,[M 7])];
combsubset=unique(combsubset,'rows');
end
combsusbet=combsubset(1:Mtotal,:);
EDIT: Another method for your needs would be to order the combinations to be able to get only a given subset. One method to order them can be explained with the following example: if you have three indices i,j,k ranging from 0 to N-1 you can use a unique index n=i*N*N+j*N+k to go over all the possibilities. Then if you want to get the nth vector:
k=mod(n,N);
j=mod((n-k)/N,N);
i=mod((((n-k)/N)-j)/N,N);
I do not know if you will find this more elegant but with the help of a little function that uses recursion you could easily get a fixed subset of your combinations.
I currently implementing an optimization algorithm that requires me to sample without replacement from several sets. Although I am coding in MATLAB, this is essentially a CS question.
The situation is as follows:
I have a finite number of sets (A, B, C) each with a finite but possibly different number of elements (a1,a2...a8, b1,b2...b10, c1, c2...c25). I also have a vector of probabilities for each set which lists a probability for each element in that set (i.e. for set A, P_A = [p_a1 p_a2... p_a8] where sum(P_A) = 1). I normally use these to create a probability generating function for each set, which given a uniform number between 0 to 1, can spit out one of the elements from that set (i.e. a function P_A(u), which given u = 0.25, will select a2).
I am looking to sample without replacement from the sets A, B, and C. Each "full sample" is a sequence of elements from each of the different sets i.e. (a1, b3, c2). Note that the space of full samples is the set of all permutations of the elements in A, B, and C. In the example above, this space is (a1,a2...a8) x (b1,b2...b10) x (c1, c2...c25) and there are 8*10*25 = 2000 unique "full samples" in my space.
The annoying part of sampling without replacement with this setup is that if my first sample is (a1, b3, c2) then that does not mean I cannot sample the element a1 again - it just means that I cannot sample the full sequence (a1, b3, c2) again. Another annoying part is that the algorithm I am working with requires me do a function evaluation for all permutations of elements that I have not sampled.
The best method at my disposal right now is to keep track the sampled cases. This is a little inefficient since my sampler is forced to reject any case that has been sampled before (since I'm sampling without replacement). I then do the function evaluations for the unsampled cases, by going through each permutation (ax, by, cz) using nested for loops and only doing the function evaluation if that combination of (ax, by, cz) is not included in the sampled cases. Again, this is a little inefficient since I have to "check" whether each permutation (ax, by, cz) has already been sampled.
I would appreciate any advice in regards to this problem. In particular, I am looking a method to sample without replacement and keep track of unsampled cases that does not explicity list out the full sample space (I usually work with 10 sets with 10 elements each so listing out the full sample space would require a 10^10 x 10 matrix). I realize that this may be impossible, though finding efficient way to do it will allow me to demonstrate the true limits of the algorithm.
Do you really need to keep track of all of the unsampled cases? Even if you had a 1-by-1010 vector that stored a logical value of true or false indicating if that permutation had been sampled or not, that would still require about 10 GB of storage, and MATLAB is likely to either throw an "Out of Memory" error or bring your entire machine to a screeching halt if you try to create a variable of that size.
An alternative to consider is storing a sparse vector of indicators for the permutations you've already sampled. Let's consider your smaller example:
A = 1:8;
B = 1:10;
C = 1:25;
nA = numel(A);
nB = numel(B);
nC = numel(C);
beenSampled = sparse(1,nA*nB*nC);
The 1-by-2000 sparse matrix beenSampled is empty to start (i.e. it contains all zeroes) and we will add a one at a given index for each sampled permutation. We can get a new sample permutation using the function RANDI to give us indices into A, B, and C for the new set of values:
indexA = randi(nA);
indexB = randi(nB);
indexC = randi(nC);
We can then convert these three indices into a single unique linear index into beenSampled using the function SUB2IND:
index = sub2ind([nA nB nC],indexA,indexB,indexC);
Now we can test the indexed element in beenSampled to see if it has a value of 1 (i.e. we sampled it already) or 0 (i.e. it is a new sample). If it has been sampled already, we repeat the process of finding a new set of indices above. Once we have a permutation we haven't sampled yet, we can process it:
while beenSampled(index)
indexA = randi(nA);
indexB = randi(nB);
indexC = randi(nC);
index = sub2ind([nA nB nC],indexA,indexB,indexC);
end
beenSampled(index) = 1;
newSample = [A(indexA) B(indexB) C(indexC)];
%# ...do your subsequent processing...
The use of a sparse array will save you a lot of space if you're only going to end up sampling a small portion of all of the possible permutations. For smaller total numbers of permutations, like in the above example, I would probably just use a logical vector instead of a sparse vector.
Check the matlab documentation for the randi function; you'll just want to use that in conjunction with the length function to choose random entries from each vector. Keeping track of each sampled vector should be as simple as just concatenating it to a matrix;
current_values = [5 89 45]; % lets say this is your current sample set
used_values = [used_values; current_values];
% wash, rinse, repeat