matlab plotting a family of functions - matlab

Generate a plot showing the graphs of
y=(2*a+1)*exp(-x)-(a+1)*exp(2*x)
in the range x ∈ <-2, 4> for all integer values of a between -3 and 3
I know how to make typical plot for 2 values and set a range on the axes, but how to draw the graph dependent on the parameter a?

To elaborate on Ben Voigt's comment: A more advanced technique would be to replace the for-loop with a call to bsxfun to generate a matrix of evaluations of M(i,j) = f(x(i),a(j)) and call plot with this matrix. Matlab will then use the columns of the matrix and plot each column with individual colors.
%%// Create a function handle of your function
f = #(x,a) (2*a+1)*exp(-x)-(a+1)*exp(2*x);
%%// Plot the data
x = linspace(-2, 4);
as = -3:3;
plot(x, bsxfun(f,x(:),as));
%%// Add a legend
legendTexts = arrayfun(#(a) sprintf('a == %d', a), as, 'uni', 0);
legend(legendTexts, 'Location', 'best');
You could also create the evaluation matrix using ndgrid, which explicitly returns all combinations of the values of x and as. Here you have to pay closer attention on properly vectorizing the code. (We were lucky that the bsxfun approach worked without having to change the original f.)
f = #(x,a) (2*a+1).*exp(-x)-(a+1).*exp(2*x); %// Note the added dots.
[X,As] = ndgrid(x,as);
plot(x, f(X,As))
However for starters, you should get familiar with loops.

You can do it using a simple for loop as follows. You basically loop through each value of a and plot the corresponding y function.
clear
clc
close all
x = -2:4;
%// Define a
a = -3:3;
%// Counter for legend
p = 1;
LegendText = cell(1,numel(a));
figure;
hold on %// Important to keep all the lines on the same plot.
for k = a
CurrColor = rand(1,3);
y= (2*k+1).*exp(-x)-(k+1).*exp(2.*x);
plot(x,y,'Color',CurrColor);
%// Text for legend
LegendText{p} = sprintf('a equals %d',k);
p = p+1;
end
legend(LegendText,'Location','best')
Which gives something like this:
You can customize the graph as you like. Hope that helps get you started!

Related

Prevent specific plot entry from being displayed on a MATLAB plot legend

I need to prevent a specific plot entry from being displayed on a Matlab plot legend.
Sample:
% x and y are any plot data
for i=1:5
plot(x,y);
plot(x2,y2,'PleaseNoLegend!'); % I need to hide this from legend
end
legend('show');
Is there any flag I can set inside the plot command so this specific entry doesn't show up in legend?
You can achieve that by setting the 'HandleVisibility' property to 'off'. Note that this hides the handles of those plots to all functions, not just to legend.
For example,
hold on
for k = 1:3
x = 1:10;
y = rand(1,10);
x2 = x;
y2 = y + 2;
plot(x,y);
plot(x2,y2,'--','HandleVisibility','off'); % Hide from legend
end
legend('show')
produces the graph
You can use the semi-documented function called hasbehavior, that allows you to ignore individual plots in a legend after you issued the plot command.
figure;
hold on;
for i=1:5
plot(x,y);
h = plot(x2,y2);
hasbehavior(h,'legend',false);
end
legend('show');
The fact that it's semi-documented suggests that it could break sooner or later in a newer MATLAB version, so use with care. It might still be a convenient choice for certain applications.
As #stephematician noted, this MATLAB built-in is also unavailable in Octave, which might be another reason why the other answers are preferable.
As Luis Mendo mentions (and I somehow missed this) the handle is hidden to all other functions in his answer, which will be ok in most situations, but an alternative solution which looks identical to the above and doesn't have this effect is:
k_values = 1:3;
h = nan(size(k_values));
x = 1:10;
hold on
for k = k_values
y = rand(size(x));
y2 = y + 2;
h(k) = plot(x,y);
plot(x,y2,'--');
end
hold off
legend(h, strcat('data', num2str(k_values')))
The final command sets the legend entry for each handle returned by the plot(x,y) command. The first argument is a 1x3 array of line handles which will appear in the legend, and the second argument is a 3x5 char matrix where each row is a label.

Generate multiple plot objects with vectors of equal length

MATLAB will generate multiple line objects when plot is used with a vector and a scalar:
a = 1:4;
ph = plot(a, 1, 'o');
numel(ph) % == 4
And usually, it is desired that plot generate a single line object for x and y arguments being vectors of the same length:
b = 1:2:8;
ph = plot(a, b, 'o');
numel(ph) % == 1
However, I'd like to generate a line object for each pair of values from a and b.
Note that the low-level line function also does not create one line per column if there is just one row.
So how can I force MATLAB to generate numel(a) line objects in an elegant way?
The best solution I could come up with uses arrayfun and requires an additional step to turn the cell array into an object array:
hold on;
ph = arrayfun(#(x, y) plot(x, y, 'o'), a, b, 'uni', 0)
ph = cat(2, ph{:});
(elegant means: no loop. Also, scatter won't work for me as it does not allow different marker types)
Edit:
Second best solution might be
ph = plot([a;nan(size(a))], [b;nan(size(a))], 'o')
This will produce four line objects but comes at the cost of having extra NaN data elements. Note the NaN have to be added to both arguments, otherwise there would be only two line series (the second one being invisible containing only NaNs for one coordinate).
If I understand you correctly, you want to plot both (or an arbitrary number) lines in one plot command. If so, you can use cellfun and input cell arrays, see example below:
x1 = 1:100;
x2 = 1:2:200;
y1 = rand(1,100);
y2 = rand(1,100);
X = {x1,x2};
Y = {y1,y2};
figure(1)
hold on
cellfun(#plot, X, Y)

Matlab update plot with multiple data lines/curves

I want to update a plot with multiple data lines/curves as fast as possible. I have seen some method for updating the plot like using:
h = plot(x,y);
set(h,'YDataSource','y')
set(h,'XDataSource','x')
refreshdata(h,'caller');
or
set(h,'XData',x,'YData',y);
For a single curve it works great, however I want to update not only one but multiple data curves. How can I do this?
If you create multiple plot objects with a single plot command, the handle returned by plot is actually an array of plot objects (one for each plot).
plots = plot(rand(2));
size(plots)
1 2
Because of this, you cannot simply assign another [2x2] matrix to the XData.
set(plots, 'XData', rand(2))
You could pass a cell array of new XData to the plots via the following syntax. This is only really convenient if you already have your new values in a cell array.
set(plots, {'XData'}, {rand(1,2); rand(1,2)})
The other options is to update each plot object individually with the new values. As far as doing this quickly, there really isn't much of a performance hit by not setting them all at once, because they will not actually be rendered until MATLAB is idle or you explicitly call drawnow.
X = rand(2);
Y = rand(2);
for k = 1:numel(plots)
set(plots(k), 'XData', X(k,:), 'YData', Y(k,:))
end
% Force the rendering *after* you update all data
drawnow
If you really want to use the XDataSource and YDataSource method that you have shown, you can actually do this, but you would need to specify a unique data source for each plot object.
% Do this when you create the plots
for k = 1:numel(plots)
set(plots(k), 'XDataSource', sprintf('X(%d,:)', k), ...
'YDataSource', sprintf('Y(%d,:)', k))
end
% Now update the plot data
X = rand(2);
Y = rand(2);
refreshdata(plots)
You can use drawnow:
%Creation of the vectors
x = 1:100;
y = rand(1,100);
%1st plot
h = plot(x,y);
pause(2);
%update y
y = rand(1,100);
set(h,'YData',y)
%update the plot.
drawnow

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.

evaluating a self made function for a cector and then plotting in matlab

i have created a function that represents a triangle sign.
this function does not work on vectors. i want to evaluate a vector x:
x=[-2:0.01:2]
and save the answer in vector y, for this purpose i came up with the following code:
for i=1:400, y(i) = triangle(x(i))
after i got the ans i plotted is using plot. in this case it worked ok but i am interested on observing the influence of time shifting and shrinking so when i try to use lets say:
for i=1:200, y(i) = triangle(x(2*i))
i get a vector y not the same length as vector x and i cant even plot them... is there any easy way to achieve it? and how should i plot the answer?
here is my function:
function [ out1 ] = triangle( input1 )
if abs(input1) < 1,
out1 = 1 - abs(input1);
else
out1 = 0;
end
end
y is a different length in each for loop because each loop iterated a different number of times. In the example below, I use the same for loops and plot y2 with the corresponding values of x. i is already defined in matlab so I've changed it to t in the example below.
clear all
x=[-2:0.01:2];
for t=1:400
y(t) = triangle(x(t));
end
for t=1:200
y2(t) = triangle(x(2*t));
end
Or, if you want to see y2 plotted over the same range you can increase the size of x:
clear all
x=[-2:0.01:8];
for t=1:400
y(t) = triangle(x(t));
end
for t=1:400
y2(t) = triangle(x(2*t));
end
plot(x(1:length(y)),y,'r')
hold on
plot(x(1:length(y2)),y2,'b')