How can I vectorize a large number of subtractions in Matlab - matlab

I have one array (the "true" cartesian coordinates) which is of size (natoms*3,1) where natoms is the number of atoms. I also have a large number (500,000) of observations stored in an array of size (nobs, natoms*3). Now, I want to create an array of the differences between all observations against the true coordinates. I would like to simply vectorize this by doing something like
for iat = 1:natoms
xyz_dif = xyz_obs(:, 3*iat-2:3*iat) - xyz_true(3*iat-2:3*iat)
end
but this does not work. Instead I am forced to go through each of the observtions like so:
for iat = 1:natoms
for iobs = 1:nobs
xyz_diff(iobs, 3*iat-2:3*iat) = xyzs(iobs, 3*iat-2:3*iat) - xyz_true(3*iat-2:3*iat)
end
end
but this seems quite inefficient. Is there a faster, more efficient way to do this?
Thanks.

use bsxfun
xyz_diff = bsxfun(#minus, xyz_true', xyz_obs)

an alternative solution, which in my view is more readable is to use matrix multiplication:
xyz_diff = xyz_obs-ones(nobs,1)*xyz_true;

Related

Looping over fifty elements at a time (matlab)

I am currently new to matlab, and I am trying to do a loop over fifty elements at a time instead of one element at a time. For example, I have a list of 1000 elements, and I would like to compute the sum for every fifty elements. Instead of doing a sum function through indexing, it would be much faster with a loop. How would I go about doing this?
I.e. [1,...50th element, 51th element... 100...]
Output would be the the sum values of 1:50, 51:100, 101:150... and so on.
Thanks in advance
I'm not really sure what you mean by "a sum function through indexing", but there are various ways to do this. In general I try to avoid explicit loops in Matlab and let MathWorks functions do their magic.
results = zeros(20,1);
for i = 1:20
results(i) = sum(1 + (50 * (i - 1)):50 + 50 * (i - 1));
end
Another option is to do something like arrayfun.
sIndex = 1:50:951;
eIndex = 50:50:1000;
result = arrayfun(#(x, y) sum(x:y), sIndex, eIndex);
You could also use reshape and sum to do it one shot.
numbers = 1:1000;
numbers2 = reshape(numbers, 50, []);
result = sum(numbers2);
This last method is what I personally would say is a Matlab way of doing it. arrayfun is basically a wrapper around a loop and the loop is...well a loop.
In case you need the sum, you can also use movsum:
array = 1:1000;
win = 50; % window size
msum = movsum(array,win,'Endpoints','discard');
in the same way, you can use:
movmax Moving maximum
movmean Moving mean
movmedian Moving median
movmin Moving minimum
movstd Moving standard deviation
movvar Moving variance
Using cumsum and diff you can obtain the desired result.
C = [0 cumsum(a)];
out = diff(C(1:50:end));

Vectorizing array indexing/subsetting in Matlab

Suppose I have a long data vector y, plus some indices into it. I want to extract a short snippet or window around every index.
For example, suppose I want to construct a matrix containing 64 samples before and 64 samples after every value that is below three. This is trivial to do in a for-loop:
WIN_SIZE = 64;
% Sample data with padding
data = [nan(WIN_SIZE,1); randn(1e6,1); nan(WIN_SIZE,1)];
% Sample events, could be anything
index = find(data < 3);
snippets = nan(length(index), 2*WIN_SIZE + 1);
for ii=1:length(index)
snippets(ii,:) = data((index(ii)-WIN_SIZE):(index(ii)+WIN_SIZE));
end
However,this is not blazingly fast. Is there any way to vectorize (or otherwise speed up) this operation?
(In case this is unclear, the index could be anything and may not necessarily be a property of the data; I just wanted something simple to illustrate the idea.)
Use bsxfun -
snippets = data(bsxfun(#plus,index(:),[-WIN_SIZE:WIN_SIZE]))

Indexing elements of parameters of a function within nested for loops

I have two matrices of results, A = 128x631 and B = 128x1014 and I have a function SSD that takes two elements (x,y) as parameters and then calculates the sum of squared differences. I also have a 631x1014 matrix of 0s, called SSDMatrix, ready to put the results of my SSD function into.
What I'm trying to do is compare each element of A with each element of B by passing them into SSD, but I can't figure out how to structure my for loops to get the desired results.
When I try:
SSDMatrix = SSD(A, B);
I get exactly the result I'm looking for, but only for the first cell. How can I repeat this process for each element of A and B?
Currently I have this:
SSDMatrix = zeros(NumFeatures1,NumFeatures2);
for i = 1:631
for j = 1:1014
SSDMatrix(i,j) = SSD(A,B);
end
end
This just results in the first answer being repeated 631*1014 times, so I need a way to index A and B to get the appropriate answer for each (i,j) of SSDMatrix.
It seems you were needed to do something like this -
SSDMatrix = zeros(NumFeatures1,NumFeatures2);
for i = 1:631
for j = 1:1014
SSDMatrix(i,j) = sum( (A(:,i) - B(:,j)).^ 2 );
end
end
This, you can achieve with pdist2 as well that gets us the square root of summed squared distances. Now, please do note that pdist2 is part of the Statistics Toolbox. So, to get the desired output, you can do -
out = pdist2(A.',B.').^2;
Or with bsxfun -
out = squeeze(sum(bsxfun(#minus,A,permute(B,[1 3 2])).^2,1));

how to do this in a for loop in Matlab

I have a 3-dimensial matrix W of size 160x170x18 and I want to compute the difference
between each sucessive matrices inside W.
For example diff1 = W(:,:,1) - W(:,:,2) and diff2 = W(:,:,2) - W(:,:,3), etc ...
Next I want to select some special parts of the resulting matrices, For example:
NewDiff1 = [diff1(20:50,110:140); diff1(60:90,110:140)];
and the same thing for the other matrices.
finally I want to compute the mean of each matrix and the error as follow:
mean1 = mean(mean(NewDiff1));
er1 = 0.1-abs(mean1);
I succeeded to do this for each matrix alone, but prefer to do all at once in a for loop.
The expression
diff1 = diff(W,1,3)
will return, in your example, a 160*170*17 matrix where diffW(:,:,1) = W(:,:,2) - W(:,:,1), which isn't quite what you want. But
diff1 = (-1)*diff(W,1,3)
does, if my arithmetic is good, give you the differences you want. From there on you need something like:
newdiff1 = [diff1(20:50,110:140,:);diff1(60:90,110:140,:)];
and
means = mean(mean(newdiff1));
er1 = 0.1 - abs(mean1);
I haven't tested this thoroughly on matrices of the size you are working with, but it seems to work OK on smaller tests.
Store your matrices into a cell array and then just loop through the contents of the cell array and apply the same differencing logic to each thing. Be careful to use the {} syntax with a cell array to get its contents, rather than () which gives you the cell at a particular location.

Vectorizing the creation of a matrix of successive powers

Let x=1:100 and N=1:10. I would like to create a matrix x^N so that the ith column contains the entries [1 i i^2 ... i^N].
I can easily do this using for loops. But is there a way to do this using vectorized code?
I'd go for:
x = 1:100;
N = 1:10;
Solution = repmat(x,[length(N)+1 1]).^repmat(([0 N])',[1 length(x)]);
Another solution (probably much more efficient):
Solution = [ones(size(x)); cumprod(repmat(x,[length(N) 1]),1)];
Or even:
Solution = bsxfun(#power,x,[0 N]');
Hope this helps.
Sounds like a Vandermonde matrix. So use vander:
A = vander(1:100);
A = A(1:10, :);
Since your matrices aren't that big, the most straight-forward way to do this would be to use MESHGRID and the element-wise power operator .^:
[x,N] = meshgrid(1:100,0:10);
x = x.^N;
This creates an 11-by-100 matrix where each column i contains [i^0; i^1; i^2; ... i^10].
Not sure if it really fits your question.
bsxfun(#power, cumsum(ones(100,10),2), cumsum(ones(100,10),1))
EDIT:
As pointed out by Adrien, my first attempt was not compliant with the OP question.
xn = 100;
N=10;
solution = [ones(1,xn); bsxfun(#power, cumsum(ones(N,xn),2), cumsum(ones(N,xn),1))];
Why not use an easy to understand for loop?
c = [1:10]'; %count to 100 for full scale problem
for i = 1:4; %loop to 10 for full scale problem
M(:,i) = c.^(i-1)
end
It takes more thinking to understand the clever vectorized versions of this code that people have shown. Mine is more of a barbarian way of doing things, but anyone reading it will understand it.
I prefer easy to understand code.
(yes, I could have pre-allocated. Not worth the lowered clarity for small cases like this.)