Related
I have a big matrix (1,000 rows and 50,000 columns). I know some columns are correlated (the rank is only 100) and I suspect some columns are even proportional. How can I find such proportional columns? (one way would be looping corr(M(:,j),M(:,k))), but is there anything more efficient?
If I am understanding your problem correctly, you wish to determine those columns in your matrix that are linearly dependent, which means that one column is proportional or a scalar multiple of another. There's a very basic algorithm based on QR Decomposition. For QR decomposition, you can take any matrix and decompose it into a product of two matrices: Q and R. In other words:
A = Q*R
Q is an orthogonal matrix with each column as being a unit vector, such that multiplying Q by its transpose gives you the identity matrix (Q^{T}*Q = I). R is a right-triangular or upper-triangular matrix. One very useful theory by Golub and Van Loan in their 1996 book: Matrix Computations is that a matrix is considered full rank if all of the values of diagonal elements of R are non-zero. Because of the floating point precision on computers, we will have to threshold and check for any values in the diagonal of R that are greater than this tolerance. If it is, then this corresponding column is an independent column. We can simply find the absolute value of all of the diagonals, then check to see if they're greater than some tolerance.
We can slightly modify this so that we would search for values that are less than the tolerance which would mean that the column is not independent. The way you would call up the QR factorization is in this way:
[Q,R] = qr(A, 0);
Q and R are what I just talked about, and you specify the matrix A as input. The second parameter 0 stands for producing an economy-size version of Q and R, where if this matrix was rectangular (like in your case), this would return a square matrix where the dimensions are the largest of the two sizes. In other words, if I had a matrix like 5 x 8, producing an economy-size matrix will give you an output of 5 x 8, where as not specifying the 0 will give you an 8 x 8 matrix.
Now, what we actually need is this style of invocation:
[Q,R,E] = qr(A, 0);
In this case, E would be a permutation vector, such that:
A(:,E) = Q*R;
The reason why this is useful is because it orders the columns of Q and R in such a way that the first column of the re-ordered version is the most probable column that is independent, followed by those columns in decreasing order of "strength". As such, E would tell you how likely each column is linearly independent and those "strengths" are in decreasing order. This "strength" is exactly captured in the diagonals of R corresponding to this re-ordering. In fact, the strength is proportional to this first element. What you should do is check to see what diagonals of R in the re-arranged version are greater than this first coefficient scaled by the tolerance and you use these to determine which of the corresponding columns are linearly independent.
However, I'm going to flip this around and determine the point in the R diagonals where the last possible independent columns are located. Anything after this point would be considered linearly dependent. This is essentially the same as checking to see if any diagonals are less than the threshold, but we are using the re-ordering of the matrix to our advantage.
In any case, putting what I have mentioned in code, this is what you should do, assuming your matrix is stored in A:
%// Step #1 - Define tolerance
tol = 1e-10;
%// Step #2 - Do QR Factorization
[Q, R, E] = qr(A,0);
diag_R = abs(diag(R)); %// Extract diagonals of R
%// Step #3 -
%// Find the LAST column in the re-arranged result that
%// satisfies the linearly independent property
r = find(diag_R >= tol*diag_R(1), 1, 'last');
%// Step #4
%// Anything after r means that the columns are
%// linearly dependent, so let's output those columns to the
%// user
idx = sort(E(r+1:end));
Note that E will be a permutation vector, and I'm assuming you want these to be sorted so that's why we sort them after the point where the vectors fail to become linearly independent anymore. Let's test out this theory. Suppose I have this matrix:
A =
1 1 2 0
2 2 4 9
3 3 6 7
4 4 8 3
You can see that the first two columns are the same, and the third column is a multiple of the first or second. You would just have to multiply either one by 2 to get the result. If we run through the above code, this is what I get:
idx =
1 2
If you also take a look at E, this is what I get:
E =
4 3 2 1
This means that column 4 was the "best" linearly independent column, followed by column 3. Because we returned [1,2] as the linearly dependent columns, this means that columns 1 and 2 that both have [1,2,3,4] as their columns are a scalar multiple of some other column. In this case, this would be column 3 as columns 1 and 2 are half of column 3.
Hope this helps!
Alternative Method
If you don't want to do any QR factorization, then I can suggest reducing your matrix into its row-reduced Echelon form, and you can determine the basis vectors that make up the column space of your matrix A. Essentially, the column space gives you the minimum set of columns that can generate all possible linear combinations of output vectors if you were to apply this matrix using matrix-vector multiplication. You can determine which columns form the column space by using the rref command. You would provide a second output to rref that gives you a vector of elements that tell you which columns are linearly independent or form a basis of the column space for that matrix. As such:
[B,RB] = rref(A);
RB would give you the locations of which columns for the column space and B would be the row-reduced echelon form of the matrix A. Because you want to find those columns that are linearly dependent, you would want to return a set of elements that don't contain these locations. As such, define a linearly increasing vector from 1 to as many columns as you have, then use RB to remove these entries in this vector and the result would be those linearly dependent columns you are seeking. In other words:
[B,RB] = rref(A);
idx = 1 : size(A,2);
idx(RB) = [];
By using the above code, this is what we get:
idx =
2 3
Bear in mind that we identified columns 2 and 3 to be linearly dependent, which makes sense as both are multiples of column 1. The identification of which columns are linearly dependent are different in comparison to the QR factorization method, as QR orders the columns based on how likely that particular column is linearly independent. Because columns 1 to 3 are related to each other, it shouldn't matter which column you return. One of these forms the basis of the other two.
I haven't tested the efficiency of using rref in comparison to the QR method. I suspect that rref does Gaussian row eliminations, where the complexity is worse compared to doing QR factorization as that algorithm is highly optimized and efficient. Because your matrix is rather large, I would stick to the QR method, but use rref anyway and see what you get!
If you normalize each column by dividing by its maximum, proportionality becomes equality. This makes the problem easier.
Now, to test for equality you can use a single (outer) loop over columns; the inner loop is easily vectorized with bsxfun. For greater speed, compare each column only with the columns to its right.
Also to save some time, the result matrix is preallocated to an approximate size (you should set that). If the approximate size is wrong, the only penalty will be a little slower speed, but the code works.
As usual, tests for equality between floating-point values should include a tolerance.
The result is given as a 2-column matrix (S), where each row contains the indices of two rows that are proportional.
A = [1 5 2 6 3 1
2 5 4 7 6 1
3 5 6 8 9 1]; %// example data matrix
tol = 1e-6; %// relative tolerance
A = bsxfun(#rdivide, A, max(A,[],1)); %// normalize A
C = size(A,2);
S = NaN(round(C^1.5),2); %// preallocate result to *approximate* size
used = 0; %// number of rows of S already used
for c = 1:C
ind = c+find(all(abs(bsxfun(#rdivide, A(:,c), A(:,c+1:end))-1)<tol));
u = numel(ind); %// number of columns proportional to column c
S(used+1:used+u,1) = c; %// fill in result
S(used+1:used+u,2) = ind; %// fill in result
used = used + u; %// update number of results
end
S = S(1:used,:); %// remove unused rows of S
In this example, the result is
S =
1 3
1 5
2 6
3 5
meaning column 1 is proportional to column 3; column 1 is proportional to column 5 etc.
If the determinant of a matrix is zero, then the columns are proportional.
There are 50,000 Columns, or 2 times 25,000 Columns.
It is easiest to solve the determinant of a 2 by 2 matrix.
Hence: to Find the proportional matrix, the longest time solution is to
define the big-matrix on a spreadsheet.
Apply the determinant formula to a square beginning from 1st square on the left.
Copy it for every row & column to arrive at the answer in the next spreadsheet.
Find the Columns with Determinants Zero.
This is Quite basic,not very time consuming and should be result oriented.
Manual or Excel SpreadSheet(Efficient)
I have this matrix of dimension mx2. What I need is a mx1 matrix such that each element of the mx1 matrix is taken as the maximum value from each 1x2 row of the mx2 matrix. I can do by iteration I know but is there a direct way?
Yes, you can do it directly. the max function in matlab lets you specify the dimension over which you want to take max on:
max(data_m_by_two, [], 2)
should give you what you want, the 2 in there says you want to take max over the second dimension of the matrix, which is over the columns.
I have different distribution for different time (t) with each distribution having 10,000 elements. I have following line of code which computes CDF for different distributions inside the loop with t varying from 1 to nT:
[f_CDF(:,t),x_CDF(:,t)]=ecdf(uncon_noise_columndata_all_nModels_diff_t(:,1,t));
Matlab's function ecdf gives CDF values which could be less than the total number of elements in the distribution because the probability for the repeated elements gets added up. As a result, the output variables f_CDF and x_CDF run into problem of ??? Subscripted assignment dimension mismatch. error because of different length of vectors at different t.
How can I sort this problem such that NaN could fill up the places where the vector's length is less than the maximum length of any vector in the whole matrix and I am able to implement the above line of code inside the loop. Thanks.
Here are two of many ways to approach this problem:
1) Use a cell array
Consider storing the results in a cell array instead of a matrix which, by definition, requires columns to have the same length.
[f_CDF{t},x_CDF{t}]=ecdf(uncon_noise_columndata_all_nModels_diff_t(:,1,t));
2) Preallocate NaN matrices
Before running the loop which calculates the CDF results, create a matrix filled with NaNs. You know that each column won't be longer than 10,000 records.
f_CDF = NaN * ones(10000, nT);
x_CDF = NaN * ones(10000, nT);
for t = 1:nT
[f_CDFTemp, x_CDFTemp]=ecdf(uncon_noise_columndata_all_nModels_diff_t(:,1,t));
f_CDF(1:length(f_CDFTemp),t) = f_CDFTemp;
x_CDF(1:length(x_CDFTemp),t) = x_CDFTemp;
end
I have a sparse logical matrix, which is quite large. I would like to draw random non-zero elements from it without storing all of its non-zero elements in a separate vector (eg. by using find command). Is there an easy way to do this?
Currently I am implementing rejection sampling, which is drawing a random element and checking whether that is non-zero or not. But it is not efficient when the ratio of non-zero elements is small.
A sparse logical matrix is not a very practical representation of your data if you want to pick random locations. Rejection sampling and find are the only two ways that make sense to me. Here's how you can do them efficiently (assuming you want to get 4 random locations):
%# using find
idx = find(S);
%# draw 4 without replacement
fourRandomIdx = idx(randperm(length(idx),4));
%# draw 4 with replacement
fourRandomIdx = idx(randi(1,length(idx),4));
%# get row, column values
[row,col] = ind2sub(size(S),fourRandomIdx);
%# using rejection sampling
density = nnz(S)/prod(size(S));
%# estimate how many samples you need to get at least 4 hits
%# and multiply by 2 (or 3)
n = ceil( 1 / (1-(1-density)^4) ) * 2;
%# random indices w/ replacement
randIdx = randi(1,n,prod(size(S)));
%# identify the first four non-zero elements
[row,col] = find(S(randIdx),4,'first');
An n x m matrix with nnz non-zero elements requires nnz + n + 1 integers to store the locations of its non-zero entries. For a logical matrix there is no need to store the value of the non-zero entries: these are all true. Correspondingly, you would do best to convert your logical sparse matrix into a list of the linear indices of its non-zero entries, together with n and m, which requires only nnz + 2 integers of storage. From these (and ind2sub) you can readily reconstruct the subscripts corresponding to any non-zero entry that you choose randomly using randi over the range 1..nnz
find is the standard interface to get the non-zero elements in a sparse matrix. Have a look here http://www.mathworks.se/help/techdoc/math/f6-9182.html#f6-13040
[i,j,s] = find(S)
find returns the row indices of nonzero values in vector i, the column indices in vector j, and the nonzero values themselves in the vector s.
No need to get s. Just pick a random index in i,j.
By representing the entries in a 3 column format, aka a coordinate list (i, j, value), you can simply select the items from the list. To get this, you can either use your original method for creating the sparse matrix (i.e. the precursor to sparse()), or use the find command, a la [i,j,s] = find(S);
If you don't need the entries, and it seems you don't, you can just extract i and j.
If, for some reason, your matrix is massive and your RAM limitations are severe, you can simply divide the matrix into regions, and let the probability of selecting a given sub-matrix be proportional to the number of non-zero elements (using nnz) in that sub-matrix. You could go so far as to divide the matrix into individual columns, and the rest of the calculation is trivial. NB: by applying sum to the matrix, you can get the per-column counts (assuming your entries are just 1s).
In this way, you need not even bother with rejection sampling (which seems pointless to me in this case, since Matlab knows where all of the non-zero entries are).
I have two 50 x 6 matrices, say A and B. I want to assign weights to each element of columns in matrix - more weight to elements occurring earlier in a column and less weight to elements occurring later in the same column...likewise for all 6 columns. Something like this:
cumsum(weight(row)*(A(row,col)-B(row,col)); % cumsum is for cumulative sum of matrix
How can we do it efficiently without using loops?
If you have your weight vector w as a 50x1 vector, then you can rewrite your code as
cumsum(repmat(w,1,6).*(A-B))
BTW, I don't know why you have the cumsum operating on a scalar in a loop... it has no effect. I'm assuming that you meant that's what you wanted to do with the entire matrix. Calling cumsum on a matrix will operate along each column by default. If you need to operate along the rows, you should call it with the optional dimension argument as cumsum(x,2), where x is whatever matrix you have.