bsxfun() Invalid output dimensions - matlab

I have a function that takes upto seven arguments and returns a row vector. The first three arguments are vectors (column, column, row) and the remaining four are optional scalars.
I want to use bsxfun() to apply the function to a vector of its last argument. Below is my attempt to do that.
o = #(m,pulse,N0,samples_per_pulse,sample_select,filter,channel_cutoff) ELE452Functions.EvaluateBER(m,pulse,N0,samples_per_pulse,sample_select,filter,channel_cutoff);
oo = #(m,pulse,N0,samples_per_pulse,sample_select,filter,channel_cutoff) bsxfun(#(N0,channel_cutoff) o(m,pulse,N0,samples_per_pulse,sample_select,filter,channel_cutoff), N0' , channel_cutoff);
when I try to call the function with a vector, oo(m,pulse,N0,1,1,1,[0.5 0.2]); for example, I get this error:
Error using bsxfun
Invalid output dimensions.
I am not experienced in using bsxfun and I tried to follow the documentation.
Update:
May be this is a clearer way to ask my question:
I want to use bsxfun to rewrite (improve) the code below with out a loop.
for i=1:length(channel_normalized_cuttoffs)
BER_LPchannel(i,:) = ELE452Functions.EvaluateBER(m,pulse,N0,1,1,1,channel_normalized_cuttoffs(i));
end

The idea behind bsxfun is to evaluate a certain function for all possible combinations of two elements (b in bsxfun stands for binary), each coming from one of the arrays. (NB: This is valid if you use it with a row and a column vector. But bsxfun can also do more.)
What you want to achieve is simply: For all entries of a single array, evaluate a function.
So bsxfun is just not the correct choice here.
You could use arrayfun instead, but this still may not perform a lot better than your original for loop, as it looks like the Matlab JIT Compiler would be able to optimize most of it, considering it's simplicity.
As I don't have the code of your function, I'm not able to test it, but your solution might look a lot like this:
evalBER = #(CNcutoffi) ELE452Functions.EvaluateBER(m,pulse,N0,1,1,1,CNcutoffi);
BER_LPchannel = arrayfun(evalBER, channel_normalized_cuttoffs, 'UniformOutput', false)

Related

Creating functions in Matlab

Hi, I am trying to write a function as per the question. I have tried to create four sub-matrices which are the reverse of each other and then multiply to give the products demanded by the question. My attempt:
function T = custom_blocksT(n,m)
T(1:end,end-1:1);
T(1:end,end:-1:1)*2;
T(1:end,end:-1:1)*3;
T(1:end,end:-1:1)*4;
What I'm unsure of is
(i) What do the the indivual sub-matrices(T(1:end,end-1:1);)need to be equal to? I was thinking of(1:3)?
(ii) I tried to create a generic sub-matrix which can take any size matrix input using end was this correct or can't you do that? I keep getting this error
Undefined function or variable 'T'.
Error in custom_blocksT (line 2)
T(1:end,end-1:1);
I have searched the Matlab documentation and stacked overflow, but the problem is I'm not quite sure what I'm supposed to be looking for in terms of solving this question.
If someone could help me I would be very thankfull.
There are many problems with your function:
function T = custom_blocksT(n,m)
T(1:end,end-1:1);
T(1:end,end:-1:1)*2;
T(1:end,end:-1:1)*3;
T(1:end,end:-1:1)*4;
end
This is an extremely basic question, I highly recommend you find and work through some very basic MATLAB tutorials before continuing, even before reading this answer to be honest.
That said here is what you should have done and a bit of what you did wrong:
First, you are getting the error that T dos not exist because it doesn't. The only variables that exist in your function are those that you create in the function or those that are passed in as parameters. You should have passed in T as a parameter, but instead you passed in n and m which you don't use.
In the question, they call the function using the example:
custom_blocks([1:3;3:-1:1])
So you can see that they are only passing in one variable, your function takes two and that's already a problem. The one variable is the matrix, not it's dimensions. And the matrix they are passing in is [1:3;3:-1:1] which if you type in the command line you will see gives you
[1 2 3
3 2 1]
So for your first line to take in one argument which is that matrix it should rather read
function TOut = custom_blocks(TIn)
Now what they are asking you to do is create a matrix, TOut, which is just different multiples of TIn concatenated.
What you've done with say TIn(1:end,end-1:1)*2; is just ask MATLAB to multiple TIn by 2 (that's the only correct bit) but then do nothing with it. Furthermore, indexing the rows by 1:end will do what you want (i.e. request all the rows) but in MATLAB you can actually just use : for that. Indexing the columns by end-1:1 will also call all the columns, but in reverse order. So in effect you are flipping your matrix left-to-right which I'm sure is not what you wanted. So you could have just written TIn(:,:) but since that's just requesting the entire matrix unchanged you could actually just write TIn.
So now to multiply and concatenate (i.e. stick together) you do this
TOut = [TIn, TIn*2; TIn*3, TIn*4]
The [] is like a concatenate operation where , is for horizontal and ; is for vertical concatenation.
Putting it all together:
function TOut = custom_blocks(TIn)
TOut = [TIn, TIn*2; TIn*3, TIn*4];
end

Matlab GPU use with functions that take arguments of different dimensions

I am trying to use parallel computing with GPU in Matlab, and I would like to apply a function to a large array (to avoid the use of a for loop, which is quite slow). I have read Matlab's documentation, and I can use arrayfun, but only if I want to do elementwise operations. Maybe I am confused, but I would appreciate if someone can help me to use it. As an example of what I want to do, imagine that I would like to perform the following operation,
$X_t = B Z_t + Q\varepsilon_t$
where $X_t$ is 2x1, $B$ is 2x5, and $Z_t$ is 5x1, with $Q$ 2x2. I define a function,
function X = propose(Z,B,Q)
X=Z*B+Q*rand(2,1);
end
Now, suppose that I have an array $Z_p$ which is 5x1000. To each of the 1000 columns I would like to apply the previous function, for given matrices $B$ and $Q$, to get an array $X_p$ which is 2x1000.
Given the documentation for arrayfun I can not do this,
X=arrayfun(#propose,Zp,B,Q)
So, is there any possibility to do it?
Thanks!
PS: Yes, I know that in this simple example I can just do the multiplication without a for loop, but the application I have in mind is more complicated and I cannot do it. I just put this example as an illustration.

How to get all outputs (MatLab)?

Suppose I have a function that gives out unknown number of output arguments (it depends on input,thus change through the loops). How to get all of them?
nargout doesn't help as the function uses varargout (the result is -1)
And of course I can't rewrite the function, otherwise the question wouldn't arise :- )
Well, thanks to all partisipated in discussion. Summing up, it seems the problem has no general solution, because MatLab itself estimates the number of desired outputs before the function call to use inside it. Three cases can be pointed out though:
1) The funcrion doesn't have varargout in definition, thus nOut=nargout(#fcn) returns positive number.
Then nOut is an actual number of outputs and we can use a cell array and a column list trick.
X=cell(1,nOut);
[X{:}]=fcn(inputs);
2) The funcrion has varargout in definition, thus nOut=nargout(#fcn) returns negative number. However some correlation with inputs can be found (like length(varargin)=length(varargout)).
Then we can calculate the resulting nOut from inputs and perform the above column list trick.
3) You know the fcn developer.
Ask him fot assistance. For example to make the function's output to be a cell array.
One of ways I usually use in this case is to store all outputs in a cell array inside the function. Getting the cell array outside the function's body, you might investigate its length and other properties.
Here is how you could deal with the problem in general. I didn't mention this solution earlier because... it is horrible.
Suppose a function can have 1 or 2 output arguments:
try
[a, b] = f(x)
catch
a = f(x)
end
Of course it is possible to do this for any number of output arguments, but you really don't want to.

Vectorizing scalars/vector division

If for example I have:
Q1=4;
Q2=5;
PG=2:60
A1=Q1./sqrt(PG);
A2=Q2./sqrt(PG);
plot(PG,A1)
plot(PG,A2)
can I do sth like : ?
Q=[Q1,Q2];
A=Q./sqrt(PG);
plot(PG,A(1))
plot(PG,A(2))
or sth to avoid the A1 and A2?
A=bsxfun(#rdivide,[Q1;Q2],sqrt(PG)) will do (note the semicolon, not comma, between Q1 and Q2), but if the code in the question is your use case and you ever want anyone else to read and understand the code, I'd advise against using it.
You have to address the rows of A using A(1,:) and A(2,:) (no matter how you get to A), but you probably want to plot(PG,A) anyway.
[edit after first comment:]
rdivide is simply the name of the function usually denoted ./ in MATLAB code, applicable to arrays of the same size or a scalar and an array. bsxfun will simply apply a two-argument function to the other two arguments supplied to it in a way it considers best-fitting (to simplify a bit). arrayfun does something similar: applying a function to all elements of one array. To apply here, one would need a function having PG hard-coded inside.

What's the best way to iterate through columns of a matrix?

I want to apply a function to all columns in a matrix with MATLAB. For example, I'd like to be able to call smooth on every column of a matrix, instead of having smooth treat the matrix as a vector (which is the default behaviour if you call smooth(matrix)).
I'm sure there must be a more idiomatic way to do this, but I can't find it, so I've defined a map_column function:
function result = map_column(m, func)
result = m;
for col = 1:size(m,2)
result(:,col) = func(m(:,col));
end
end
which I can call with:
smoothed = map_column(input, #(c) (smooth(c, 9)));
Is there anything wrong with this code? How could I improve it?
The MATLAB "for" statement actually loops over the columns of whatever's supplied - normally, this just results in a sequence of scalars since the vector passed into for (as in your example above) is a row vector. This means that you can rewrite the above code like this:
function result = map_column(m, func)
result = [];
for m_col = m
result = horzcat(result, func(m_col));
end
If func does not return a column vector, then you can add something like
f = func(m_col);
result = horzcat(result, f(:));
to force it into a column.
Your solution is fine.
Note that horizcat exacts a substantial performance penalty for large matrices. It makes the code be O(N^2) instead of O(N). For a 100x10,000 matrix, your implementation takes 2.6s on my machine, the horizcat one takes 64.5s. For a 100x5000 matrix, the horizcat implementation takes 15.7s.
If you wanted, you could generalize your function a little and make it be able to iterate over the final dimension or even over arbitrary dimensions (not just columns).
Maybe you could always transform the matrix with the ' operator and then transform the result back.
smoothed = smooth(input', 9)';
That at least works with the fft function.
A way to cause an implicit loop across the columns of a matrix is to use cellfun. That is, you must first convert the matrix to a cell array, each cell will hold one column. Then call cellfun. For example:
A = randn(10,5);
See that here I've computed the standard deviation for each column.
cellfun(#std,mat2cell(A,size(A,1),ones(1,size(A,2))))
ans =
0.78681 1.1473 0.89789 0.66635 1.3482
Of course, many functions in MATLAB are already set up to work on rows or columns of an array as the user indicates. This is true of std of course, but this is a convenient way to test that cellfun worked successfully.
std(A,[],1)
ans =
0.78681 1.1473 0.89789 0.66635 1.3482
Don't forget to preallocate the result matrix if you are dealing with large matrices. Otherwise your CPU will spend lots of cycles repeatedly re-allocating the matrix every time it adds a new row/column.
If this is a common use-case for your function, it would perhaps be a good idea to make the function iterate through the columns automatically if the input is not a vector.
This doesn't exactly solve your problem but it would simplify the functions' usage. In that case, the output should be a matrix, too.
You can also transform the matrix to one long column by using m(:,:) = m(:). However, it depends on your function if this would make sense.