I have a simulink model. The model has a sorted order(order of execution). When i save a model to file .mdl there is no a information about a sorted order.
I tried to save it to rtf file (File -> Reports -> System Design Description) but i expect more parseable format.
Are there any ways to save this order to any file?
Thanks
I don't think so, as the sorted order gets determined on compilation of the model. It isn't a property of the model as such, rather a consequence of how the model is constructed. You can't save that sort of information to a file.
EDIT:
I stand corrected. There is a way to access the information, but you need to use the Simulink debugger. For more details, see slist.
Related
I am working on physics simulation research. I have a large fixed grid in one of my projects that does not vary with time. The fields on the grid, on the other hand, vary with time in the simulation. I need to use VTK to record the field data in each step for visualization (Paraview).
The method I am using is to write a separate *.vtu file to disk at each time step. This basically serves the purpose, but actually writes a lot of duplicate data (re-recording the geometry of the mesh at each step), which not only consumes more disk space, but also wastes time on encoding and parsing.
I would like to have a way to write the mesh information only once, and the rest of the time only new field data is written, while being able to guarantee the same visualization. Please let me know if VTK and Paraview provide such an interface and how to implement it.
Using .pvtu and refer to the same .vtu as Piece for each step should do the trick.
See this similar post on the ParaView discourse, and the pvtu doc
EDIT
This seems to be a side effect of the format, this is not supported by the writer.
The correct solution is to use another file format ...
Let me provide my own research findings for reference.
As Nico said, with the combination of pvtu/vtu files, we could theoretically implement a geometry structure stored in a separate vtu file, referenced by a pvtu file. Setting the NumberOfPieces attribute of the ptvu file to 1 would enable the construction of only one separate vtu file.
However, the VTK library does not expose a dedicated operation interface to control the writing process of vtu files. No matter how it is set, as long as the writer's input contains geometry structures, the writer will write geometry information to disk, and this process cannot be skipped through the exposed interface.
However, it is indeed possible to make multiple pvtu files point to the same vtu file by manually editing the piece node in the ptvu file, and paraview can recognize and visualize such a file group properly.
I did not proceed to try adding arrays to the unstructured grid and using pvtu output.
So, I think the conclusion is.
if you don't want to dive into VTK's library code and XML implementation, then this approach doesn't make sense.
if you are willing to write a series of files, delete most of them from the vtu file, and then point all the pvtu's piece nodes to the only surviving vtu file by editing the pvtu file, you can save a lot of disk space, but will not shorten the write, read, and parse times.
If you implement an XML writer by yourself, you can achieve all the requirements in theory, but it requires a lot of coding work.
I am trying to compare model versions and extract what is added/deleted/modified by querying the difference tree. The difference tree can be programmatically obtained through slxmlcomp Doc
Edits = slxmlcomp.compare(ModelA_before, ModelA_after).
Is there a neat way to compare an empty model with a model? For instance, I want to compare a Simulink model file that doesnot exist before and now a new Simulink model file is added.
Current Approach: The Edits Object (which is read only ) will have a left and right tree. I need the left tree to have practically nothing (or root only.) I have been doing the comparison by comparing the added file vs deleting content . This way of comparison still leaves behind configuration being modified rather than added.
I'm new to Matlab and I need some suggestions on how to deal with having many inputs to a function.
The program reads data from multiple elements and stores them in an array, which I'm doing in a loop. The problem is that if I input the wrong information about one element, I must re-input the data all over again. I believe that there must exist a better way to input these data, like reading it from a external file, for example.
The problem with the external file would be, as far as I know, with the reading of multiple arrays from a single file, hence the need of multiple external files - and I believe also that must exist some better way.
As noted by #beaker, you can use save and load to store the data. You can store multiple variables in a given file without a problem.
I'm working on an extensive Matlab based GUI that was created with GUIDE. Saving the full state of a GUI seems to be a laborious task as it is generally impossible to efficiently make a self-contained copy of the handles structure. From what I've gathered in my web searches, the current work-around is to manually create a new structure and store the necessary properties of all the uicontrols in the GUI in appropriately named fields. For example if there's a uitable in the GUI, you might want to include in the new structure a field called tabledata where you store the Data from the uitable. The idea is then to save this new structure to a .mat file and load the state of the GUI again by reading this file and doing the inverse exercise of manually copying fields.
I called the above a work-around instead of a solution because it's quite laborious for a large GUI. If anyone has a better/quicker/shorter/cleaner way to do this, please feel free to share! I've come up with a shorter and from some points of view cleaner way myself, but there are a few reasons why I might still prefer the above work-around. In any case my question is about that work-around.
The biggest problem with it is that your saving and loading code must be inclusive: every value and property that can be adjusted by the user should be saved into the newly created structure. For a large GUI it's a real pain, nigh on impossible, to find out which values and properties are adjustable by manually checking everything. Especially with the properties of one uicontrol possibly influencing certain properties of one or more other uicontrols. So my question is: is there a way to get an overview of all the values and properties that a user can influence for a given GUI?
Look into a function called uiinspect coded by Yair Altman. It produces a list of all methods, callbacks, and properties.
A full explanation of how the function work s is located here.
I am having issues with 'data overload' while processing point cloud data in MATLAB. This is what I am currently doing:
I begin with my raw data files, each in the order of ~30Mb each.
I then do initial processing on them to extract n individual objects and remove outlying points, which are all combined into a 1 x n structure, testset, saved into testset.mat (~100Mb).
So far so good. Now things become complicated:
For each point in each object in testset, I will compute one of a number of features, which ends up being a matrix of some size (for each point). The size of the matrix, and some other properties of the computation, are parameters of the calculations. I save these computed features in a 1 x n cell array, each cell of which contains an array of the matrices for each point.
I then save this cell array in a .mat file, where the name specified the parameters, the name of the test data used and the types of features extracted. For example:
testset_feature_type_A_5x5_0.2x0.2_alpha_3_beta_4.mat
Now for each of these files, I then do some further processing (using a classification algorithm). Again there are more parameters to set.
So now I am in a tricky situation, where each final piece of the initial data has come through some path, but the path taken (and the parameters set along that path) are not intrinsically held with the data itself.
So my question is:
Is there a better way to do this? Can anyone who has experience in working with large datasets in MATLAB suggest a way to store the data and the parameter settings more efficiently, and more integrally?
Ideally, I would be able to look up a certain piece of data without having to use regex on the file strings—but there is also an incentive to keep individually processed files separate to save system memory when loading them in (and to help prevent corruption).
The time taken for each calculation (some ~2 hours) prohibits computing data 'on the fly'.
For a similar problem, I have created a class structure that does the following:
Each object is linked to a raw data file
For each processing step, there is a property
The set method of the properties saves the data to file (in a directory with the same name as
the raw data file), stores the file name, and updates a "status" property to indicate that this step is done.
The get method of the properties loads the data if the file name has been stored and the status indicates "done".
Finally, the objects can be saved/loaded, so that I can do some processing now, save the object, later load it and I immediately know how far along the particular data set is in the processing pipeline.
Thus, the only data in memory is the data that is currently being worked on, and you can easily know which data set is at which processing stage. Furthermore, if you set up your methods to accept arrays of objects, you can do very convenient batch processing.
I'm not completely sure if this is what you need, but the save command allows you to store multiple variables inside a single .mat file. If your parameter settings are, for example, stored in an array, then you can save this together with the data set in a single .mat file. Upon loading the file, both the dataset and the array with parameters are restored.
Or do you want to be able to load the parameters without loading the file? Then I would personally opt for the cheap solution of having a second set of files with just the parameters (but similar filenames).