I'm trying to generate a random road which will be used as input for a Quarter-car model.
I used the procedure described in this article http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12544-013-0127-8/fulltext.html .
In Figure 2, generated roads are plotted with a maximum elevation of 15 mm for A-B category and 100 mm for D-E. My problem is that I get much higher amplitudes from those reported by them.
I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong, any guidance would be appreciated.
Length of road = 250 meters
Spatial frequency band = 0.004 -> 4
I used the formula (8) and the simplified version (9) from the article both give me same results.
My matlab code:
clear all;close all;
% spatial frequency (n0) cycles per meter
Omega0 = 0.1;
% psd ISO (used for formula 8)
Gd_0 = 32 * (10^-6);
% waveviness
w = 2;
% road length
L = 250;
%delta n
N = 1000;
Omega_L = 0.004;
Omega_U = 4;
delta_n = 1/L; % delta_n = (Omega_U - Omega_L)/(N-1);
% spatial frequency band
Omega = Omega_L:delta_n:Omega_U;
%PSD of road
Gd = Gd_0.*(Omega./Omega0).^(-w);
% calculate amplitude using formula(8) in the article
%Amp = sqrt(2*Gd*delta_n);
%calculate amplitude using simplified formula(9) in the article
k = 3;
Amp = sqrt(delta_n) * (2^k) * (10^-3) * (Omega0./Omega);
%random phases
Psi = 2*pi*rand(size(Omega));
% x abicsa from 0 to L
x = 0:0.25:250;
% road sinal
h= zeros(size(x));
for i=1:length(x)
h(i) = sum( Amp.*cos(2*pi*Omega*x(i) + Psi) );
end
plot(x, h*1000 );
xlabel('Distance m');
ylabel('Elevation (mm)');
grid on
In this paper:
Josef Melcer “numerical simulation of vehicle motion along the road structure”, 2012 (just google it)
only the final formula for road hight is given (formula 4) and is different from the formula in the paper of Agostinacchio. The difference is the 2*pi in the cosin term. Deleting the 2*pi term leads to much "better" amplitudes (better in a sense of “the scripted plot fits better to the plots in the paper of Agostinacchio”). But I am not sure if this is physical and mathematical correct.
Do you have another solution?
I managed to contact the author of the article to review my code and he said it's correct. It seems that the values for 'k' were wrong in the article, k=6 was actually k=5, k=5 was k=4 and so on, that`s why the amplitudes were higher than expected.
Of course, the formulas are slightly different from article to article, some use the sin() instead of cos() or the angular spatial frequency(which already includes the 2*pi term) instead of the spatial frequency.
Related
I have a set of frequency data with peaks to which I need to fit a Gaussian curve and then get the full width half maximum from. The FWHM part I can do, I already have a code for that but I'm having trouble writing code to fit the Gaussian.
Does anyone know of any functions that'll do this for me or would be able to point me in the right direction? (I can do least squares fitting for lines and polynomials but I can't get it to work for gaussians)
Also it would be helpful if it was compatible with both Octave and Matlab as I have Octave at the moment but don't get access to Matlab until next week.
Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Fitting a single 1D Gaussian directly is a non-linear fitting problem. You'll find ready-made implementations here, or here, or here for 2D, or here (if you have the statistics toolbox) (have you heard of Google? :)
Anyway, there might be a simpler solution. If you know for sure your data y will be well-described by a Gaussian, and is reasonably well-distributed over your entire x-range, you can linearize the problem (these are equations, not statements):
y = 1/(σ·√(2π)) · exp( -½ ( (x-μ)/σ )² )
ln y = ln( 1/(σ·√(2π)) ) - ½ ( (x-μ)/σ )²
= Px² + Qx + R
where the substitutions
P = -1/(2σ²)
Q = +2μ/(2σ²)
R = ln( 1/(σ·√(2π)) ) - ½(μ/σ)²
have been made. Now, solve for the linear system Ax=b with (these are Matlab statements):
% design matrix for least squares fit
xdata = xdata(:);
A = [xdata.^2, xdata, ones(size(xdata))];
% log of your data
b = log(y(:));
% least-squares solution for x
x = A\b;
The vector x you found this way will equal
x == [P Q R]
which you then have to reverse-engineer to find the mean μ and the standard-deviation σ:
mu = -x(2)/x(1)/2;
sigma = sqrt( -1/2/x(1) );
Which you can cross-check with x(3) == R (there should only be small differences).
Perhaps this has the thing you are looking for? Not sure about compatability:
http://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/11733-gaussian-curve-fit
From its documentation:
[sigma,mu,A]=mygaussfit(x,y)
[sigma,mu,A]=mygaussfit(x,y,h)
this function is doing fit to the function
y=A * exp( -(x-mu)^2 / (2*sigma^2) )
the fitting is been done by a polyfit
the lan of the data.
h is the threshold which is the fraction
from the maximum y height that the data
is been taken from.
h should be a number between 0-1.
if h have not been taken it is set to be 0.2
as default.
i had similar problem.
this was the first result on google, and some of the scripts linked here made my matlab crash.
finally i found here that matlab has built in fit function, that can fit Gaussians too.
it look like that:
>> v=-30:30;
>> fit(v', exp(-v.^2)', 'gauss1')
ans =
General model Gauss1:
ans(x) = a1*exp(-((x-b1)/c1)^2)
Coefficients (with 95% confidence bounds):
a1 = 1 (1, 1)
b1 = -8.489e-17 (-3.638e-12, 3.638e-12)
c1 = 1 (1, 1)
I found that the MATLAB "fit" function was slow, and used "lsqcurvefit" with an inline Gaussian function. This is for fitting a Gaussian FUNCTION, if you just want to fit data to a Normal distribution, use "normfit."
Check it
% % Generate synthetic data (for example) % % %
nPoints = 200; binSize = 1/nPoints ;
fauxMean = 47 ;fauxStd = 8;
faux = fauxStd.*randn(1,nPoints) + fauxMean; % REPLACE WITH YOUR ACTUAL DATA
xaxis = 1:length(faux) ;fauxData = histc(faux,xaxis);
yourData = fauxData; % replace with your actual distribution
xAxis = 1:length(yourData) ;
gausFun = #(hms,x) hms(1) .* exp (-(x-hms(2)).^2 ./ (2*hms(3)^2)) ; % Gaussian FUNCTION
% % Provide estimates for initial conditions (for lsqcurvefit) % %
height_est = max(fauxData)*rand ; mean_est = fauxMean*rand; std_est=fauxStd*rand;
x0 = [height_est;mean_est; std_est]; % parameters need to be in a single variable
options=optimset('Display','off'); % avoid pesky messages from lsqcurvefit (optional)
[params]=lsqcurvefit(gausFun,x0,xAxis,yourData,[],[],options); % meat and potatoes
lsq_mean = params(2); lsq_std = params(3) ; % what you want
% % % Plot data with fit % % %
myFit = gausFun(params,xAxis);
figure;hold on;plot(xAxis,yourData./sum(yourData),'k');
plot(xAxis,myFit./sum(myFit),'r','linewidth',3) % normalization optional
xlabel('Value');ylabel('Probability');legend('Data','Fit')
I have a series of 2D measurements (time on x-axis) that plot to a non-smooth (but pretty good) sawtooth wave. In an ideal world the data points would form a perfect sawtooth wave (with partial amplitude data points at either end). Is there a way of calculating the (average) period of the wave, using OCTAVE/MATLAB? I tried using the formula for a sawtooth from Wikipedia (Sawtooth_wave):
P = mean(time.*pi./acot(tan(y./4))), -pi < y < +pi
also tried:
P = mean(abs(time.*pi./acot(tan(y./4))))
but it didn't work, or at least it gave me an answer I know is out.
An example of the plotted data:
I've also tried the following method - should work - but it's NOT giving me what I know is close to the right answer. Probably something simple and wrong with my code. What?
slopes = diff(y)./diff(x); % form vector of slopes for each two adjacent points
for n = 1:length(diff(y)) % delete slope of any two points that form the 'cliff'
if abs(diff(y(n,1))) > pi
slopes(n,:) = [];
end
end
P = median((2*pi)./slopes); % Amplitude is 2*pi
Old post, but thought I'd offer my two-cent's worth. I think there are two reasonable ways to do this:
Perform a Fourier transform and calculate the fundamental
Do a curve-fitting of the phase, period, amplitude, and offset to an ideal square-wave.
Given curve-fitting will likely be difficult because of discontinuities in saw-wave, so I'd recommend Fourier transform. Self-contained example below:
f_s = 10; # Sampling freq. in Hz
record_length = 1000; # length of recording in sec.
% Create noisy saw-tooth wave, with known period and phase
saw_period = 50;
saw_phase = 10;
t = (1/f_s):(1/f_s):record_length;
saw_function = #(t) mod((t-saw_phase)*(2*pi/saw_period), 2*pi) - pi;
noise_lvl = 2.0;
saw_wave = saw_function(t) + noise_lvl*randn(size(t));
num_tsteps = length(t);
% Plot time-series data
figure();
plot(t, saw_wave, '*r', t, saw_function(t));
xlabel('Time [s]');
ylabel('Measurement');
legend('measurements', 'ideal');
% Perform fast-Fourier transform (and plot it)
dft = fft(saw_wave);
freq = 0:(f_s/length(saw_wave)):(f_s/2);
dft = dft(1:(length(saw_wave)/2+1));
figure();
plot(freq, abs(dft));
xlabel('Freqency [Hz]');
ylabel('FFT of Measurement');
% Estimate fundamental frequency:
[~, idx] = max(abs(dft));
peak_f = abs(freq(idx));
peak_period = 1/peak_f;
disp(strcat('Estimated period [s]: ', num2str(peak_period)))
Which outputs a couple of graphs, and also the estimated period of the saw-tooth wave. You can play around with the amount of noise and see that it correctly gets a period of 50 seconds till very high levels of noise.
Estimated period [s]: 50
I'm trying to find the peak frequency for two signals 'CA1' and 'PFC', within a specified range (25-140Hz).
In Matlab, so far I have plotted an FFT for each of these signals (see pictures below). These FFTs suggest that the peak frequency between 25-140Hz is different for each signal, but I would like to quantify this (e.g. CA1 peaks at 80Hz, whereas PFC peaks at 55Hz). However, I think the FFT is not smooth enough, so when I try and extract the peak frequencies it doesn't make sense as my code pulls out loads of values. I was only expecting a few values - one each time the FFT peaks (around 2Hz, 5Hz and ~60Hz).
I want to know, between 25-140Hz, what is the peak frequency in 'CA1' compared with 'PFC'. 'CA1' and 'PFC' are both 152401 x 7 matrices of EEG data, recorded
from 7 separate individuals. I want the MEAN peak frequency for each data set (i.e. averaged across the 7 test subjects for CA1 and PFC).
My code so far (based on Matlab help files and code I've scrabbled together online):
Fs = 508;
%notch filter
[b50,a50] = iirnotch(50/(Fs/2), (50/(Fs/2))/70);
CA1 = filtfilt(b50,a50,CA1);
PFC = filtfilt(b50,a50,PFC);
%FFT
L = length(CA1);
NFFT = 2^nextpow2(L);
%FFT for each of the 7 subjects
for i = 1:size(CA1,2);
CA1_FFT(:,i) = fft(CA1(:,i),NFFT)/L;
PFC_FFT(:,i) = fft(PFC(:,i),NFFT)/L;
end
%Average FFT across all 7 subjects - CA1
Mean_CA1_FFT = mean(CA1_FFT,2);
% Mean_CA1_FFT_abs = 2*abs(Mean_CA1_FFT(1:NFFT/2+1));
%Average FFT across all 7 subjects - PFC
Mean_PFC_FFT = mean(PFC_FFT,2);
% Mean_PFC_FFT_abs = 2*abs(Mean_PFC_FFT(1:NFFT/2+1));
f = Fs/2*linspace(0,1,NFFT/2+1);
%LEFT HAND SIDE FIGURE
plot(f,2*abs(Mean_CA1_FFT(1:NFFT/2+1)),'r');
set(gca,'ylim', [0 2]);
set(gca,'xlim', [0 200]);
[C,cInd] = sort(2*abs(Mean_CA1_FFT(1:NFFT/2+1)));
CFloor = 0.1; %CFloor is the minimum amplitude value (ignore small values)
Amplitudes_CA1 = C(C>=CFloor); %find all amplitudes above the CFloor
Frequencies_CA1 = f(cInd(1+end-numel(Amplitudes_CA1):end)); %frequency of the peaks
%RIGHT HAND SIDE FIGURE
figure;plot(f,2*abs(Mean_PFC_FFT(1:NFFT/2+1)),'r');
set(gca,'ylim', [0 2]);
set(gca,'xlim', [0 200]);
[P,pInd] = sort(2*abs(Mean_PFC_FFT(1:NFFT/2+1)));
PFloor = 0.1; %PFloor is the minimum amplitude value (ignore small values)
Amplitudes_PFC = P(P>=PFloor); %find all amplitudes above the PFloor
Frequencies_PFC = f(pInd(1+end-numel(Amplitudes_PFC):end)); %frequency of the peaks
Please help!! How do I calculate the 'major' peak frequencies from an FFT, and ignore all the 'minor' peaks (because the FFT is not smoothed).
FFTs assume that the signal has no trend (this is called a stationary signal), if it does then this will give a dominant frequency component at 0Hz as you have here. Try using the MATLAB function detrend, you may find this solves your problem.
Something along the lines of:
x = x - mean(x)
y = detrend(x, 'constant')
I'm attempting to use scale space implementation to fit n Gaussian curves to peaks in a noisy time series digital signal (measuring voltage).
To test it I created the following sample sum of three gaussians with noise (0.2*rand, sorry no picture, i'm new here)
amp = [2; 0.9; 1.3];
mu = [19; 23; 28];
sigma = [4.8; 1.3; 2.5];
x = linspace(1,50,1000);
for n=1:3, y(n,:) = A(n)*exp(-(x-B(n)).^2./(2*C(n)^2)); end
noisysignal = y(1,:) + y(2,:) + y(3,:) + 0.2*rand(1,numel(x))
I found this article http://www.engineering.wright.edu/~agoshtas/GMIP94.pdf posted by user355856 answer to thread "Peak decomposition"!
I believe my code generates the correct result for plotting the zero crossings as a function of the gaussian filter resolution sigma, but I have two issues. The first is that it seems yet another fitting routine would be needed to identify the approximate location of the arch intercepts for approximating the initial peak sigma and mu values. The second is that the edges of the scale space plot have substantial arches that definitely do not correspond to any peak. I'm not sure how to screen these out effectively. Last thing is that is used a spacing of 50 when calculating the second derivative central finite difference since too much more destroyed feature, and to much less results in a forest of zero crossings. Would there be a better way to filter that to control random zero crossings in the gaussian peak tails?
function [crossing] = scalespace(x, y, sigmalimit)
figure; hold on; ylim([0 sigmalimit]);
for sigma = 1:sigmalimit %
yconv = convkernel(sigma, y); %convolve with kernel
xconv = linspace(x(1), x(end), length(yconv));
yconvpp = d2centralfinite(xconv, yconv, 50); % 50 was empirically chosen
num = 0;
for i = 1 : length(yconvpp)-1
if sign(yconvpp(i)) ~= sign(yconvpp(i+1))
crossing(sigma, num+1) = xconv(i);
num = num+1;
end
end
plot(crossing(sigma, crossing(sigma, :) ~= 0),...
sigma*ones(1, numel(crossing(sigma, crossing(sigma, :) ~= 0))), '.');
end
function [yconv] = convkernel(sigma, y)
t = sigma^2;
C = 3; % for kernel truncation
M = C*round(sqrt(t))+1;
window = (-M) : (+M);
G = zeros(1, length(window));
G(:) = (1/(2*pi()*t))*exp(-(window.^2)./(2*t));
yconv = conv(G, y);
This is my first post and I apologize in advance for any issues in style. I'm fairly new to programming, so any advice regarding the programming style or information provided in this question would be much appreciated. I also read through Amro's answer about matlab's GMM function! if anyone feels that would be a more efficient approach to modeling multiple gaussians in a digital signal.
Thank you!
I am trying to compare the FFT of exp(-t^2) to the function's analytical fourier transform, exp(-(w^2)/4)/sqrt(2), over the frequency range -3 to 3.
I have written the following matlab code and have iterated on it MANY times now with no success.
fs = 100; %sampling frequency
dt = 1/fs;
t = 0:dt:10-dt; %time vector
L = length(t); %number of sample points
%N = 2^nextpow2(L); %necessary?
y = exp(-(t.^2));
Y=dt*ifftshift(abs(fft(y)));
freq = (-L/2:L/2-1)*fs/L; %freq vector
F = (exp(-(freq.^2)/4))/sqrt(2); %analytical solution
%Y_valid_pts = Y(W>=-3 & W<=3); %compare for freq = -3 to 3
%npts = length(Y_valid_pts);
% w = linspace(-3,3,npts);
% Fe = (exp(-(w.^2)/4))/sqrt(2);
error = norm(Y - F) %L2 Norm for error
hold on;
plot(freq,Y,'r');
plot(freq,F,'b');
xlabel('Frequency, w');
legend('numerical','analytic');
hold off;
You can see that right now, I am simply trying to get the two plots to look similar. Eventually, I would like to find a way to do two things:
1) find the minimum sampling rate,
2) find the minimum number of samples,
to reach an error (defined as the L2 norm of the difference between the two solutions) of 10^-4.
I feel that this is pretty simple, but I can't seem to even get the two graphs visually agree.
If someone could let me know where I'm going wrong and how I can tackle the two points above (minimum sampling frequency and minimum number of samples) I would be very appreciative.
Thanks
A first thing to note is that the Fourier transform pair for the function exp(-t^2) over the +/- infinity range, as can be derived from tables of Fourier transforms is actually:
Finally, as you are generating the function exp(-t^2), you are limiting the range of t to positive values (instead of taking the whole +/- infinity range).
For the relationship to hold, you would thus have to generate exp(-t^2) with something such as:
t = 0:dt:10-dt; %time vector
t = t - 0.5*max(t); %center around t=0
y = exp(-(t.^2));
Then, the variable w represents angular frequency in radians which is related to the normalized frequency freq through:
w = 2*pi*freq;
Thus,
F = (exp(-((2*pi*freq).^2)/4))*sqrt(pi); %analytical solution