I am trying to use the Metropolis Hastings algorithm with a random walk sampler to simulate samples from a function $$ in matlab, but something is wrong with my code. The proposal density is the uniform PDF on the ellipse 2s^2 + 3t^2 ≤ 1/4. Can I use the acceptance rejection method to sample from the proposal density?
N=5000;
alpha = #(x1,x2,y1,y2) (min(1,f(y1,y2)/f(x1,x2)));
X = zeros(2,N);
accept = false;
n = 0;
while n < 5000
accept = false;
while ~accept
s = 1-rand*(2);
t = 1-rand*(2);
val = 2*s^2 + 3*t^2;
% check acceptance
accept = val <= 1/4;
end
% and then draw uniformly distributed points checking that u< alpha?
u = rand();
c = u < alpha(X(1,i-1),X(2,i-1),X(1,i-1)+s,X(2,i-1)+t);
X(1,i) = c*s + X(1,i-1);
X(2,i) = c*t + X(2,i-1);
n = n+1;
end
figure;
plot(X(1,:), X(2,:), 'r+');
You may just want to use the native implementation of matlab mhsample.
Regarding your code, there are a few things missing:
- function alpha,
- loop variable i (it might be just n but it is not suited for indexing since it starts at zero).
And you should always allocate memory in matlab if you want to fill it dynamically, i.e. X in your case.
To expand on the suggestions by #max, the code appears to work if you change the i indices to n and replace
n = 0;
with
n = 2;
X(:,1) = [.1,.1];
It would probably be better to assign X(:,1) to random values within your accept region (using the same code you use later), and/or include a burn-in period.
Depending upon what you are going to do with this, it may also make things cleaner to evaluate the argument to sin in the f function to keep it within 0 to 2 pi (likely by shifting the value by 2 pi if it exceeds those bounds)
I'm trying to implement my own fft in MATLAB the following way:
function z=FastFourierTransform(x)
N=length(x);
if N <= 1
z = x;
else
range = (0:N/2-1);
e = exp(-2i*pi/N).^range;
odd = FastFourierTransform(x(1:2:N-1));
even = e.*FastFourierTransform(x(2:2:N));
z = [even + odd, even - odd];
end
return
Turns out, there seems to be somthing wrong with it since it does not give the same result as the built in function provided by MATLAB.
I'm calling the function the following way:
N = 128;
x = 32*pi*(1:N)'/N;
u = cos(x/16).*(1+sin(x/16));
actualSolution = fft(u);
actualSolution
mySolution = FastFourierTransform(u)';
mySolution
actualSolution
mySolution
The numbers are always the same but they sometimes differ in their sign.
You have swapped odd and even.
Using this line to compute z will produce the correct FFT:
z = [odd + even, odd - even];
My guess is that the source of confusion is that Matlab uses 1-based indices, and the pseudocode you used to implement the function uses 0-based indices.
I have a set of three vectors (stored into a 3xN matrix) which are 'entangled' (e.g. some value in the second row should be in the third row and vice versa). This 'entanglement' is based on looking at the figure in which alpha2 is plotted. To separate the vector I use a difference based approach where I calculate the difference of one value with respect the three next values (e.g. comparing (1,i) with (:,i+1)). Then I take the minimum and store that. The method works to separate two of the three vectors, but not for the last.
I was wondering if you guys can share your ideas with me how to solve this problem (if possible). I have added my coded below.
Thanks in advance!
Problem in figures:
clear all; close all; clc;
%%
alpha2 = [-23.32 -23.05 -22.24 -20.91 -19.06 -16.70 -13.83 -10.49 -6.70;
-0.46 -0.33 0.19 2.38 5.44 9.36 14.15 19.80 26.32;
-1.58 -1.13 0.06 0.70 1.61 2.78 4.23 5.99 8.09];
%%% Original
figure()
hold on
plot(alpha2(1,:))
plot(alpha2(2,:))
plot(alpha2(3,:))
%%% Store start values
store1(1,1) = alpha2(1,1);
store2(1,1) = alpha2(2,1);
store3(1,1) = alpha2(3,1);
for i=1:size(alpha2,2)-1
for j=1:size(alpha2,1)
Alpha1(j,i) = abs(store1(1,i)-alpha2(j,i+1));
Alpha2(j,i) = abs(store2(1,i)-alpha2(j,i+1));
Alpha3(j,i) = abs(store3(1,i)-alpha2(j,i+1));
[~, I] = min(Alpha1(:,i));
store1(1,i+1) = alpha2(I,i+1);
[~, I] = min(Alpha2(:,i));
store2(1,i+1) = alpha2(I,i+1);
[~, I] = min(Alpha3(:,i));
store3(1,i+1) = alpha2(I,i+1);
end
end
%%% Plot to see if separation worked
figure()
hold on
plot(store1)
plot(store2)
plot(store3)
Solution using extrapolation via polyfit:
The idea is pretty simple: Iterate over all positions i and use polyfit to fit polynomials of degree d to the d+1 values from F(:,i-(d+1)) up to F(:,i). Use those polynomials to extrapolate the function values F(:,i+1). Then compute the permutation of the real values F(:,i+1) that fits those extrapolations best. This should work quite well, if there are only a few functions involved. There is certainly some room for improvement, but for your simple setting it should suffice.
function F = untangle(F, maxExtrapolationDegree)
%// UNTANGLE(F) untangles the functions F(i,:) via extrapolation.
if nargin<2
maxExtrapolationDegree = 4;
end
extrapolate = #(f) polyval(polyfit(1:length(f),f,length(f)-1),length(f)+1);
extrapolateAll = #(F) cellfun(extrapolate, num2cell(F,2));
fitCriterion = #(X,Y) norm(X(:)-Y(:),1);
nFuncs = size(F,1);
nPoints = size(F,2);
swaps = perms(1:nFuncs);
errorOfFit = zeros(1,size(swaps,1));
for i = 1:nPoints-1
nextValues = extrapolateAll(F(:,max(1,i-(maxExtrapolationDegree+1)):i));
for j = 1:size(swaps,1)
errorOfFit(j) = fitCriterion(nextValues, F(swaps(j,:),i+1));
end
[~,j_bestSwap] = min(errorOfFit);
F(:,i+1) = F(swaps(j_bestSwap,:),i+1);
end
Initial solution: (not that pretty - Skip this part)
This is a similar solution that tries to minimize the sum of the derivatives up to some degree of the vector valued function F = #(j) alpha2(:,j). It does so by stepping through the positions i and checks all possible permutations of the coordinates of i to get a minimal seminorm of the function F(1:i).
(I'm actually wondering right now if there is any canonical mathematical way to define the seminorm so we get our expected results... I initially was going for the H^1 and H^2 seminorms, but they didn't quite work...)
function F = untangle(F)
nFuncs = size(F,1);
nPoints = size(F,2);
seminorm = #(x,i) sum(sum(abs(diff(x(:,1:i),1,2)))) + ...
sum(sum(abs(diff(x(:,1:i),2,2)))) + ...
sum(sum(abs(diff(x(:,1:i),3,2)))) + ...
sum(sum(abs(diff(x(:,1:i),4,2))));
doSwap = #(x,swap,i) [x(:,1:i-1), x(swap,i:end)];
swaps = perms(1:nFuncs);
normOfSwap = zeros(1,size(swaps,1));
for i = 2:nPoints
for j = 1:size(swaps,1)
normOfSwap(j) = seminorm(doSwap(F,swaps(j,:),i),i);
end
[~,j_bestSwap] = min(normOfSwap);
F = doSwap(F,swaps(j_bestSwap,:),i);
end
Usage:
The command alpha2 = untangle(alpha2); will untangle your functions:
It should even work for more complicated data, like these shuffled sine-waves:
nPoints = 100;
nFuncs = 5;
t = linspace(0, 2*pi, nPoints);
F = bsxfun(#(a,b) sin(a*b), (1:nFuncs).', t);
for i = 1:nPoints
F(:,i) = F(randperm(nFuncs),i);
end
Remark: I guess if you already know that your functions will be quadratic or some other special form, RANSAC would be a better idea for larger number of functions. This could also be useful if the functions are not given with the same x-value spacing.
I am trying to rewrite part of a vector given that:
t = -10:.1:10
x = exp((-3.*t);
The length of x will be 201, and I want to rewrite the first 100 values.
The only way I've gotten to work is by doing this:
EDIT Fixed typo.
t = 0:.1:10;
x = exp((-3.*t); % EDIT: THERE WAS A TYPO HERE
z = zeros(1,100);
for k = 1 : 100
x(k) = z(k);
end
There are three questions. First: What is a faster and more efficient way of doing this? Second: What do I do if I don't want to overwrite the first part of the code but rather the middle or the second part? Third: Is there a way of utilizing the full range of t where t = -10:.1:10 and just ignoring the first half instead of writing a whole new variable for it?
First: Nothing else I've tried has been successful.
Second: The only way I can think to do that is to append the two vectors together, but then it doesn't overwrite the data, so that is a no go.
Third:I have tried an if statement and that didn't work at all.
Your code appears to assign something to y, then changes the value of x. I assume that is a typo - and not the problem you actually want to fix.
In general, if you have
t = -10:0.1:10; % my preference: t = linspace(-10,10,201);
and
y = exp(-3 * t );
but you want to set the first 100 elements of y to zero, you can then do
y(1:100) = 0;
If you wanted never to compute y(1:100) in the first place you might do
y = zeros(size(t));
y(101:end) = exp(-3 * t(101:end));
There are many variations on this. I think the above code samples address all three of your questions.
change your
for k = 1 : 100
x(k) = z(k); % i think it should be y(k) though
end
to
x(1:100) = 0;
You could use logical indexing; that is, you can use a logical statement to select elements of a vector/matrix:
t = -10:0.1:10;
x = exp((-3.*t);
x(t < 0) = 0;
This works for the middle of a matrix too:
x(t > -5 & t < 5) = whatever;
I am trying to generate an array from some starting values using this formula in MATLAB:
yt = a0 + ∑i=1p (ai ⋅ yt-i), t ≥ p
p is some small number compared to T (max t). I have been able to make this using two for cycles but it is really slow. Is there some easy way to do it?
First p values of y are provided and vector a (its length is p+1) is provided too...
This is what I have so far, but now when I tried it, it doesn't work 100% (I think it's because of indexing from 1 in MATLAB):
y1 = zeros(T+1, 1);
y1(1:p) = y(1:p);
for t = p+1:T+1
value = a1(1);
for j = 2:p+1
value = value + a1(j)*y1(t-j+1);
end
y1(t) = value;
end
EDIT: I solved it, I am just not used to Matlab indexing from 1...
This statement
if(p>=t)
looks odd inside a loop whose index expression is
for t = p+1:T+1
which seems to guarantee that t>p for the entire duration of the loop. Is that what you meant to write ?
EDIT in response to comment
Inside a loop indexed with this statement
for j = 2:p
how does the reference you make to a(j) ever call for a(0) ?
y1 = zeros(T+1, 1);
y1(1:p) = y(1:p);
for t = p+1:T+1
value = a1(1);
for j = 2:p+1
value = value + a1(j)*y1(t-j+1);
end
y1(t) = value;
end