I need to evaluate following expression (in pseudo-math notation):
∑ipi⋅n
where p is a matrix of three-element vectors and n is a three-element vector. I can do this with for loops as follows but I can't figure out
how to vectorize this:
p = [1 1 1; 2 2 2];
n = [3 3 3];
s = 0;
for i = 1:size(p, 1)
s = s + dot(p(i, :), n)
end
Why complicate things? How about simple matrix multiplication:
s = sum(p * n(:))
where p is assumed to be an M-by-3 matrix.
I think you can do it with bsxfun:
sum(sum(bsxfun(#times,p,n)))
----------
% Is it the same for this case?
----------
n = 200; % depending on the computer it might be
m = 1000*n; % that n needs to be chosen differently
A = randn(n,m);
x = randn(n,1);
p = zeros(m,1);
q = zeros(1,m);
tic;
for i = 1:m
p(i) = sum(x.*A(:,i));
q(i) = sum(x.*A(:,i));
end
time = toc; disp(['time = ',num2str(time)]);
Related
I would like to write a Matlab code to calculate the following:
\sum_{k=0}^{N-1} \frac{1}{k!} \sum_{i=0}^{k} {k \choose i}(a-1)^{k-i} a^k
and my code is:
N = 3;
a = [3 4];
for k = 0:N-1
f = 0;
for i = 0:k
f = f + nchoosek(k,i).* a.^k .* (a-1).^(k-i);
end
sumoff = sum(f);
all = (( 1./ (factorial(k))).*sumoff);
end
overall= sum(all);
'all' variable gives different value when it is inside the for loop rather than outside. But I want it to calculate when k = 0:N-1. What am I doing wrong?
Thank you.
The issue is your current code overwrites all on every iteration. Moving it outside the loop also doesn't work because you'll only save the result of the last iteration.
To save the all of every iteration, define all as a vector and then assign each intermediate result into that vector:
N = 3;
a = [3 4];
% preallocate a vector for `all`
all = nan(N-1, 1);
for k = 0:N-1
f = 0;
for i = 0:k
f = f + nchoosek(k,i) .* a.^k .* (a-1).^(k-i);
end
sumoff = sum(f);
% assign your intermediate result into the `all` vector
all(k+1) = ((1./(factorial(k))) .* sumoff);
end
overall = sum(all);
There are two matrix X and M and I need to obtain the following matrix D
m = 20; n = 10;
X = rand(m,n);
M = rand(m,m);
M = (M + M')/2;
D = zeros(n,n);
for i = 1:n
for j = 1:n
D(i,j) = X(:,i)'*M*X(:,j);
end
end
When n and m are large, the computation of D is very slow. Is there any way to speed up?
The answer would be:
D = 0.5*X.'*(M+M')*X
(This is a slight modification of the solution provided by Divakar, so that the correct matrix D is returned)
I would like to generate all the possible adjacency matrices (zero diagonale) of an undirected graph of n nodes.
For example, with no relabeling for n=3 we get 23(3-1)/2 = 8 possible network configurations (or adjacency matrices).
One solution that works for n = 3 (and which I think is quite stupid) would be the following:
n = 3;
A = [];
for k = 0:1
for j = 0:1
for i = 0:1
m = [0 , i , j ; i , 0 , k ; j , k , 0 ];
A = [A, m];
end
end
end
Also I though of the following which seems to be faster but something is wrong with my indexing since 2 matrices are missing:
n = 3
C = [];
E = [];
A = zeros(n);
for i = 1:n
for j = i+1:n
A(i,j) = 1;
A(j,i) = 1;
C = [C,A];
end
end
B = ones(n);
B = B- diag(diag(ones(n)));
for i = 1:n
for j = i+1:n
B(i,j) = 0;
B(j,i) = 0;
E = [E,B];
end
end
D = [C,E]
Is there a faster way of doing this?
I would definitely generate the off-diagonal elements of the adjacency matrices with binary encoding:
n = 4; %// number of nodes
m = n*(n-1)/2;
offdiags = dec2bin(0:2^m-1,m)-48; %//every 2^m-1 possible configurations
If you have the Statistics and Machine Learning Toolbox, then squareform will easily create the matrices for you, one by one:
%// this is basically a for loop
tmpcell = arrayfun(#(k) squareform(offdiags(k,:)),1:size(offdiags,1),...
'uniformoutput',false);
A = cat(2,tmpcell{:}); %// concatenate the matrices in tmpcell
Although I'd consider concatenating along dimension 3, then you can see each matrix individually and conveniently.
Alternatively, you can do the array synthesis yourself in a vectorized way, it's probably even quicker (at the cost of more memory):
A = zeros(n,n,2^m);
%// lazy person's indexing scheme:
[ind_i,ind_j,ind_k] = meshgrid(1:n,1:n,1:2^m);
A(ind_i>ind_j) = offdiags.'; %'// watch out for the transpose
%// copy to upper diagonal:
A = A + permute(A,[2 1 3]); %// n x n x 2^m matrix
%// reshape to n*[] matrix if you wish
A = reshape(A,n,[]); %// n x (n*2^m) matrix
I have 2 matrices = X in R^(n*m) and W in R^(k*m) where k<<n.
Let x_i be the i-th row of X and w_j be the j-th row of W.
I need to find, for each x_i what is the j that maximizes <w_j,x_i>
I can't see a way around iterating over all the rows in X, but it there a way to find the maximum dot product without iterating every time over all of W?
A naive implementation would be:
n = 100;
m = 50;
k = 10;
X = rand(n,m);
W = rand(k,m);
Y = zeros(n, 1);
for i = 1 : n
max_ind = 1;
max_val = dot(W(1,:), X(i,:));
for j = 2 : k
cur_val = dot(W(j,:),X(i,:));
if cur_val > max_val
max_val = cur_val;
max_ind = j;
end
end
Y(i,:) = max_ind;
end
Dot product is essentially matrix multiplication:
[~, Y] = max(W*X');
bsxfun based approach to speed-up things for you -
[~,Y] = max(sum(bsxfun(#times,X,permute(W,[3 2 1])),2),[],3)
On my system, using your dataset I am getting a 100x+ speedup with this.
One can think of two more "closeby" approaches, but they don't seem to give any huge improvement over the earlier one -
[~,Y] = max(squeeze(sum(bsxfun(#times,X,permute(W,[3 2 1])),2)),[],2)
and
[~,Y] = max(squeeze(sum(bsxfun(#times,X',permute(W,[2 3 1]))))')
I have two matrices of big sizes, which are something similar to the following matrices.
m; with size 1000 by 10
n; with size 1 by 10.
I would like to subtract each element of n from all elements of m to get ten different matrices, each has size of 1000 by 10.
I started as follows
clc;clear;
nrow = 10000;
ncol = 10;
t = length(n)
for i = 1:nrow;
for j = 1:ncol;
for t = 1:length(n);
m1(i,j) = m(i,j)-n(1);
m2(i,j) = m(i,j)-n(2);
m3(i,j) = m(i,j)-n(3);
m4(i,j) = m(i,j)-n(4);
m5(i,j) = m(i,j)-n(5);
m6(i,j) = m(i,j)-n(6);
m7(i,j) = m(i,j)-n(7);
m8(i,j) = m(i,j)-n(8);
m9(i,j) = m(i,j)-n(9);
m10(i,j) = m(i,j)-n(10);
end
end
end
can any one help me how can I do it without writing the ten equations inside the loop? Or can suggest me any convenient way especially when the two matrices has many columns.
Why can't you just do this:
m01 = m - n(1);
...
m10 = m - n(10);
What do you need the loop for?
Even better:
N = length(n);
m2 = cell(N, 1);
for k = 1:N
m2{k} = m - n(k);
end
Here we go loopless:
nrow = 10000;
ncol = 10;
%example data
m = ones(nrow,ncol);
n = 1:ncol;
M = repmat(m,1,1,ncol);
N = permute( repmat(n,nrow,1,ncol) , [1 3 2] );
result = bsxfun(#minus, M, N );
%or just
result = M-N;
Elapsed time is 0.018499 seconds.
or as recommended by Luis Mendo:
M = repmat(m,1,1,ncol);
result = bsxfun(#minus, m, permute(n, [1 3 2]) );
Elapsed time is 0.000094 seconds.
please make sure that your input vectors have the same orientation like in my example, otherwise you could get in trouble. You should be able to obtain that by transposements or you have to modify this line:
permute( repmat(n,nrow,1,ncol) , [1 3 2] )
according to your needs.
You mentioned in a comment that you want to count the negative elements in each of the obtained columns:
A = result; %backup results
A(A > 0) = 0; %set non-negative elements to zero
D = sum( logical(A),3 );
which will return the desired 10000x10 matrix with quantities of negative elements. (Please verify it, I may got a little confused with the dimensions ;))
Create the three dimensional result matrix. Store your results, for example, in third dimension.
clc;clear;
nrow = 10000;
ncol = 10;
N = length(n);
resultMatrix = zeros(nrow, ncol, N);
neg = zeros(ncol, N); % amount of negative values
for j = 1:ncol
for i = 1:nrow
for t = 1:N
resultMatrix(i,j,t) = m(i,j) - n(t);
end
end
for t = 1:N
neg(j,t) = length( find(resultMatrix(:,j,t) < 0) );
end
end