I have two "graphs" which differ from each other at a maximum of 0.006 , if one doesn't inspect the graph one might think that there is a large difference . How can i make them look more close to each other. I would want the scale not to change if I zoom the picture ,how can i do that
Look at the y axis , these two graphs are close to each other but look far from each other if you really don't consider the y axis
If you don't care about changing the y values when plotting, you need to make sure that each graph is plotted with respect to the same scale. One thing you could try is to normalize both plots so that the y values both fall within a certain dynamic range. One popular range is simply [0,1]. As such, given your two signals y1 and y2 that you want to plot, do something like this:
y1_new = (y1 - min(y1)) / (max(y1) - min(y1));
y2_new = (y2 - min(y2)) / (max(y2) - min(y2));
You would then plot y1_new and y2_new on the same figure. The above transformation is a very standard way of taking a set of points or input data and transforming it so that the minimum is 0 and the maximum is 1.
Give that a whirl and see how it goes!
A maximum difference of .006 is rather significant, when the maximal value of one of the curve is .001.
If the y axis ran from say 1000.000 to 1000.007, you would have a valid claim that the difference is negligible.
Related
I have a huge set of data of a timelapse of 2D laser scans of waves running up and down stairs (see fig.1fig.2fig.3).
There is a lot of noise in the scans, since the water splashes a lot.
Now I want to smoothen the scans.
I have 2 questions:
How do I apply a moving median filter (as recommended by another study dealing with a similar problem)? I can only find instructions for single e.g. (x,y) or (t,y) plots but not for x and y values that vary over time. Maybe an average filter would do it as well, but I do not have a clue on that either.
The scanner is at a fixed point (222m) so all the data spikes point towards that point at the ceiling. Is it possible or necessary to include this into the smoothing process?
This is the part of the code (I hope it's enough to get it):
% Plot data as real time profile
x1=data.x;y1=data.y;
t=data.t;
% add moving median filter here?
h1=plot(x1(1,:),y1(1,:));
axis([210 235 3 9])
ht=title('Scanner data');
for i=1:1:length(t);
set(h1,'XData',x1(i,:),'YData',y1(i,:));set(ht,'String',sprintf('t = %5.2f
s',data.t(i)));pause(.01);end
The data.x values are stored in a (mxn) matrix in which the change in time is arranged vertically and the x values i.e. "laser points" of the scanner are horizontally arranged. The data.y is stored in the same way. The data.t values are stored in a (mx1) matrix.
I hope I explained everything clearly and that somebody can help me. I am already pretty desperate about it... If there is anything missing or confusing, please let me know.
If you're trying to apply a median filter in the x-y plane, then consider using medfilt2 from the Image Processing Toolbox. Note that this function only accepts 2-D inputs, so you'll have to loop over the third dimension.
Also note that medfilt2 assumes that the x and y data are uniformly spaced, so if your x and y data don't fall onto a uniformly spaced grid you may have to manually loop over indices, extract the corresponding patches, and compute the median.
If you can/want to apply an averaging filter instead of a median filter, and if you have uniformly spaced data, then you can use convn to compute a k x k moving average by doing:
y = convn(x, ones(k,k)/(k*k), 'same');
Note that you'll get some bias on the boundaries because you're technically trying to compute an average of k^2 pixels when you have less than that number of values available.
Alternatively, you can use nested calls to movmean since the averaging operation is separable:
y = movmean(movmean(x, k, 2), k, 1);
If your grid is separable, but not uniform, you can still use movmean, just use the SamplePoints name-value pair:
y = movmean(movmean(x, k, 2, 'SamplePoints', yv), k, 1, 'SamplePoints', xv);
You can also control the endpoint handling in movmean with the Endpoints name-value pair.
this is my problem:
I have the next data "A", which looks like:
As you can see, I have drawn with red circles the apparently peaks, the most defined are 2 and 7, I say that they are defined because its standard deviation is low in comparison with the other peaks (especially the second one).
What I need is a way (anyway) to get the values and the standard deviation of n peaks in a numeric array.
I have tried with "clusters", but I got no good results:
First of all, I used "kmeans" MATLAB function, and I realize that this algorithm doesn't group peaks as I need. As you can see in the picture above, in the red circle, that cluster has at less 3 or 4 peaks. And kmeans need that you set the number of clusters, and I need to identify it automatically.
I hope that anyone can give me some ideas, or a way to get better results, thanks.
Pd: I leave the data "A" in the next link.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4WGV21GqSL5a2EyQ2l0SHZURzA/edit?usp=sharing
The problem is that your axes have very different meaning.
K-means optimizes variance. But variance in X is something entirely different than variance in Y, isn't it? Furthermore, each of these methods will split your data in both X and Y, whereas I assume you want the data to be partitioned on the X axis only.
I suggest the following: consider the Y axis to be a weight, and X axis to be a position.
Then perform weighted density estimation, and look for low density to separate your clusters.
I can't help you with MATLAB. I don't use it.
Mathematically, what you want to do is place a Gaussian at each point, with area Y and center X. Then find minima and maxima on the sum of these Gaussians. See Wikipedia, Kernel Density Estimation for details; except that you want to use the Y axis as weights. You could maybe also use 1/Y as standard deviation, if you don't want to use weights.
I'm trying to find some peaks in Matlab, but the function findpeaks.m doesn't have the width option. The peaks I want to be detected are in the balls. All the detected are in the red squares. As you can see they have a low width. Any help?
here's the code I use:
[pk,lo] = findpeaks(ecg);
lo2 = zeros(size(lo));
for m = 1:length(lo) - 1
if (ecg(m) - ecg(m+1)) > 0.025
lo2(m) = lo(m);
end
end
p = find(lo2 == 0);
lo2(p) = [];
figure, plot(ecg);
hold on
plot(lo, ecg(lo), 'rs');
By the looks of it you want to characterise each peak in terms of amplitude and width, so that you can apply thresholds (or simmilar) to these values to select only those meeting your criteria (tall and thin).
One way you could do this is to fit a normal distribution to each peak, pegging the mean and amplitude to the value you have found already, and using an optimisation function to find the standard deviation (width of normal distribution).
So, you would need a function which calculates a representation of your data based on the sum of all the gaussian distributions you have, and an error function (mean squared error perhaps) then you just need to throw this into one of matlabs inbuilt optimisation/minimisation functions.
The optimal set of standard deviation parameters would give you the widths of each peak, or at least a good approximation.
Another method, based on Adiel's comment and which is perhaps more appropriate since it looks like you are working on ecg data, would be to also find the local minima (troughs) as well as the peaks. From this you could construct an approximate measure of 'thinness' by taking the x-axis distance between the troughs on either side of a given peak.
You need to define a peak width first, determine how narrow you want your peaks to be and then select them accordingly.
For instance, you can define the width of a peak as the difference between the x-coordinates at which the y-coordinates equal to half of the peak's value (see here). Another approach, (which seems more appropriate here) is to measure the gradient at fixed distances from the peak itself, and selecting the peaks accordingly. In MATLAB, you'll probably use a gradient filter for that :
g = conv(ecg, [-1 0 1], 'same'); %// Gradient filter
idx = g(lo) > thr); %// Indices of narrow peaks
lo = lo(idx);
where thr is the threshold value that you need to determine for yourself. Lower threshold values mean more tolerance for wider peaks.
You need to define what it means to be a peak of interest, and what you mean by the width of that peak. Once you do those things, you are a step ahead.
Perhaps you might locate each peak using find peaks. Then locate the troughs, one of which should lie between each pair of peaks. A trough is simply a peak of -y. Make sure you worry about the first and last peaks/troughs.
Next, define the half height points as the location midway in height between each peak and trough. This can be done using a reverse linear interpolation on the curve.
Finally, the width at half height might be simply the distance (on the x axis) between those two half height points.
Thinking pragmatically, I suppose you could use something along the lines of this simple brute-force approach:
[peaks , peakLocations] = findpeaks(+X);
[troughs, troughLocations] = findpeaks(-X);
width = zeros(size(peaks));
for ii = 1:numel(peaks)
trough_before = troughLocations( ...
find(troughLocations < peakLocations(ii), 1,'last') );
trough_after = troughLocations( ...
find(troughLocations > peakLocations(ii), 1,'first') );
width(ii) = trough_after - trough_before;
end
This will find the distance between the two troughs surrounding a peak of interest.
Use the 'MinPeakHeight' option in findpeaks() to pre-prune your data. By the looks of it, there is no automatic way to extract the peaks you want (unless you somehow have explicit indices to them). Meaning, you'll have to select them manually.
Now of course, there will be many more details that will have to be dealt with, but given the shape of your data set, I think the underlying idea here can nicely solve your problem.
I have a vector that I want to print a histogram of of data for. This data ranges from -100 to +100. The amount of data around the outer edges is insignificant and therefore I don't want to see it. I am most interested in showing data from -20 to +20.
1.) How can I limit that window to print on my histogram?
The amount of data I have at 0 outnumbers of the amount of data I have anywhere in the dataset by a minimum of 10:1. When I print the histogram, the layout of element frequency is lost because it is outnumbered by 0.
2.) Is there a way that I can scale the number of 0 values to be three times the number of -1 entries?
I am expecting an exponential drop of this dataset (in general) and therefore three times the frequency of -1 would easily allow me to see the frequency of the other data.
You can use something like
binCenters = -20:5:20;
[N,X] = hist(V,binCenters);
N = N./scalingVector;
bar(X(2:end-1),N(2:end-1));
Note that the code excludes the extremes of N and X from the bar plot, since they contain the number of values smaller than -20 and larger than 20. Also, by building scalingVector appropriately, you can scale N as you please.
You could also just toss out any values outside the [-20,20] range by using
subsetData=data(abs(data)<=20)
1) You can limit the histogram range you see on the plot by just setting the X axes limits:
xlim([-20 20])
Setting bins in hist command is good, but remember thatall the values outside the bins will fall into the most left and right bin. So you will need to set the axes limits anyway.
2) If there is a big difference between values in different bins, one way is to transform values on Y axes to log scale. Unfortunately just setting Y axes to log (set(gca,'YScale','log')) does not work for bar plot. Calculate the histogram with hist or histc (depending on whether you want to specify bins centers or edges) and log2 the values:
[y, xbin] = hist(data);
bar(xbin, log2(y) ,'hist')
Histogram has a few different methods of calling it. I strongly recommend you read the documentation on the function (doc hist)
What you are looking for is to put in a custom range in the histogram bin. It depends a bit on how many bins you want, but something like this will work.
Data=randn(1000,1)*20;
hist(Data,-20:20);
You could, if you want to, change the frequency of the binning as well. You could also change the axis so that you only focus on the range from -20 to 20, using a xaxis([-20 20]) command. You could also ignore the bin at 0, by using an yaxis and limiting the values to exclude the 0 bin. Without knowing what you want exactly, I can only give you suggestions.
I have real world 3D points which I want to project on a plane. The most of intensity [0-1] values fall in lower region (near zero).
Please see image 'before' his attched below.
I tried to normalize values
Col_=Intensity; % before
max(Col_)=0.46;min(Col_)=0.06;
Col=(Col_-min(Col_))/(max(Col_)-min(Col_));% after
max(Col)=1;min(Col)=0;
But still i have maximum values falling in lower region (near zero).
Please see second fig after normalization.
Result is still most of black region.Any suggestion. How can I strech my intensity information.
regards,!
It looks like you have already normalized as much as you can with linear scaling. If you want to get more contrast, you will have to give up preserving the original scaling and use a non-linear equalization.
For example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histogram_equalization
If you have the image processing toolbox, matlab will do it for you:
http://www.mathworks.com/help/toolbox/images/ref/histeq.html
It looks like you have very few values outside the first bin, if you don't need to preserve the uniqueness of the intensities, you could just scale by a larger amount and clip the few that exceed 1.
When I normalize intensities I do something like this:
Col = Col - min(Col(:));
Col = Col/max(Col(:));
This will normalize your data points to the range [0,1].
Now, since you have many small values, you might be able to make out small changes better through log scaling.
Col_scaled = log(1+Col);
Linear scaling with such data rarely works for me. Using the log function is akin to tweaking gamma for visualization purposes.
I think the only thing you can do here is reduce the range.
After normalization do the following:
t = 0.1;
Col(Col > t) = t;
This will simply truncate the range of the data, which may be sufficient for what you are doing. Then you can re-normalize again if you wish.