exponential random numbers with a bound in matlab - matlab

I want to pick values between, say, 50 and 150 using an exponential random number generator (a flat hazard function). How do I implement bounds on the built-in exponential random number function in matlab?

A quick way is to a sequence longer than you need, and throw out values outside your desired range.
dist = exprnd(100,1,1000);
%# mean of 100 ---^ ^---^--- 1x1000 random numbers
dist(dist<50 | dist>150) = []; %# will be shorter than 1000
If you don't have enough values after pruning, you can repeat and append onto the vector, or however else you want to do it.

exprandn uses rand (see >> open exprnd.m) so you can bound the output of that instead by reversing the process and sampling uniformly within the desired range [r1, r2].
sizeOut = [1, 1000]; % sample size
mu = 100; % parameter of exponential
r1 = 50; % lower bound
r2 = 150; % upper bound
r = exprndBounded(mu, sizeOut, r1, r2); % bounded output
function r = exprndBounded(mu, sizeOut, r1, r2);
minE = exp(-r1/mu);
maxE = exp(-r2/mu);
randBounded = minE + (maxE-minE).*rand(sizeOut);
r = -mu .* log(randBounded);
The drawn densities (using a non-parametric kernel estimator) look like the following for 20K samples

Related

How to use the randn function in Matlab to create an array of values (range 0-10) of size 1,000 that follows a Gaussian distribution? [duplicate]

Matlab has the function randn to draw from a normal distribution e.g.
x = 0.5 + 0.1*randn()
draws a pseudorandom number from a normal distribution of mean 0.5 and standard deviation 0.1.
Given this, is the following Matlab code equivalent to sampling from a normal distribution truncated at 0 at 1?
while x <=0 || x > 1
x = 0.5 + 0.1*randn();
end
Using MATLAB's Probability Distribution Objects makes sampling from truncated distributions very easy.
You can use the makedist() and truncate() functions to define the object and then modify (truncate it) to prepare the object for the random() function which allows generating random variates from it.
% MATLAB R2017a
pd = makedist('Normal',0.5,0.1) % Normal(mu,sigma)
pdt = truncate(pd,0,1) % truncated to interval (0,1)
sample = random(pdt,numRows,numCols) % Sample from distribution `pdt`
Once the object is created (here it is pdt, the truncated version of pd), you can use it in a variety of function calls.
To generate samples, random(pdt,m,n) produces a m x n array of samples from pdt.
Further, if you want to avoid use of toolboxes, this answer from #Luis Mendo is correct (proof below).
figure, hold on
h = histogram(cr,'Normalization','pdf','DisplayName','#Luis Mendo samples');
X = 0:.01:1;
p = plot(X,pdf(pdt,X),'b-','DisplayName','Theoretical (w/ truncation)');
You need the following steps
1. Draw a random value from uniform distribution, u.
2. Assuming the normal distribution is truncated at a and b. get
u_bar = F(a)*u +F(b) *(1-u)
3. Use the inverse of F
epsilon= F^{-1}(u_bar)
epsilon is a random value for the truncated normal distribution.
Why don't you vectorize? It will probably be faster:
N = 1e5; % desired number of samples
m = .5; % desired mean of underlying Gaussian
s = .1; % desired std of underlying Gaussian
lower = 0; % lower value for truncation
upper = 1; % upper value for truncation
remaining = 1:N;
while remaining
result(remaining) = m + s*randn(1,numel(remaining)); % (pre)allocates the first time
remaining = find(result<=lower | result>upper);
end

Generating larger random integers - MATLAB

Trying to assign appropriate value to x that would result in random integers between 1 to 60. Any suggestions? I did randn but am getting small numbers over and over. Here's the code so far:
function s = Q11sub1(x)
x = % <------ Question is what goes here
if x <= 30
s = "small";
elseif x > 30 & x <= 50
s = "medium";
else
s = "high";
end
end
Use randi:
randi(60)
This will give you a pseudorandom integer between 1 to 60.
Reference: https://www.mathworks.com/help/matlab/ref/randi.html
The problem is randn generates random numbers that follow a standard Normal distribution, e.g. Normal(mu = 0, std = 1).
As #Banghua Zhao points out, you want the randi function and I'll add they will be uniformly distributed across the integers (inclusively) between those integer bounds (known as the discrete uniform distribution).
The code X = randi([a b],N,M) will generate a NxM matrix of integers uniformly distributed on the interval [a,b] inclusively. A call randi(Imax) defaults the lower bound to 1.
See the difference below.
N = 500; % Number of samples
a = 1; % Lower integer bound
b = 60; % Upper integer bound
X = randi([a b],N,1); % Random integers between [a,b]
Y = randn(N,1);
figure, hold on, box on
histogram(X)
histogram(Y)
legend('randi[1,60]','randn','Location','southeast')
xlabel('Result')
ylabel('Observed Frequency')
title({'randi([a b],N,1) vs randn(N,1)';'N = 500'})
EDIT: At #Max's suggestion, I've added 60*randn.
% MATLAB R2017a
W = 60*randn(N,1);
figure, hold on, box on
hx = histogram(X,'Normalization','pdf')
hw = histogram(W,'Normalization','pdf')
legend('randi[1,60]','60*randn','Location','southeast')
xlabel('Result')
ylabel('Observed Estimated Density')
title({'randi([a b],N,1) vs 60*randn(N,1)';['N = ' num2str(N)]})

Why is the matlab filter order limited by one third of the length of data minus one?

I have a question regarding filters in matlab.
I wonder why the filter order in MATLAB is limited by n_order = floor(length(t)/3)-1 as in the example below? Is this a numerical requirement for filter to work?
Also, n_order is equal to the size of the window, thus this limit permits creating 3 windows with the maximum order size. Is there a way to create more windows with the same filter order?
The code below is just to give an example to you.
t = linspace(0,4*pi,1000);
rng default %initialize random number generator
x = sin(t) + 0.25*rand(size(t));
dt = t(2)-t(1);
Fs = 1/dt; % Sampling frequency
f_band = [0.01 2];
n_order = floor(length(t)/3)-1; % max order (will result in 3 windows)
n_wind_filtLen = n_order+1; % step-length of windows
df = Fs/n_wind_filtLen; % frequency bin size
b = fir1(n_order,f_band/(Fs/2),'bandpass',hamming(n_order+1)); % a=1;
x_fil = filtfilt(b,1,x); % a=1;
figure;
plot(t, x,'-k','linewidth',2); hold on;
plot(t, x_fil,'-.r','linewidth',2);
This requirement comes from the function filtfilt. You can find its documentation here.
By typing help filtfilt, you can read:
The length of the input X must be more than three times the filter
order, defined as max(length(B)-1,length(A)-1).
This limitation is confirmed in the function's source code:
nb = numel(b);
nfilt = max(nb,na);
nfact = max(1,3*(nfilt-1)); % length of edge transients
if Npts <= nfact % input data too short
error(message('signal:filtfilt:InvalidDimensionsDataShortForFiltOrder',num2str(nfact)));
end
If you want to increase the order, you have to increase the length of your data.
The other limitation, comes from the function fir1:
The window vector must have n + 1 elements.

Matlab: trying to estimate multifractal spectrum from time series by histogram box-counting

I am using the approach from this Yale page on fractals:
http://classes.yale.edu/fractals/MultiFractals/Moments/TSMoments/TSMoments.html
which is also expounded on this set of lecture slides (slide 32):
http://multiscale.emsl.pnl.gov/docs/multifractal.pdf
The idea is that you get a dataset, and examine it through many histograms with increasing numbers of bars i.e. resolution. Once resolution is high enough, some bars take the value zero. At each of these stages, we take the number of results that fall into each histogram bin (neglecting any zero-valued bins), divide it by the total size of the dataset, and raise this to a power, q. This operation gives the 'partition function' for a given moment and bin size. Quoting the above linked tutorial: "Provides a selective characterization of the nonhomogeneity of the
measure, positive q’s accentuating the densest regions and negative q’s the smoothest regions."
So I'm using the histogram function in Matlab, looping over bin sizes, summing over all the non-zero bin contents, and so forth. But my output array of partition functions is just a bunch of 1s. I can't see what's going wrong, can anybody else?
Data for intel, cisco, apple and others is available on the same Yale website: yale.edu/fractals/MultiFractals/Finf(a)/Finf(a).html
N.B. intel refers to the intel stock price I was originally using as the dataset.
lower = 1; %set lowest level of histogram resolution (bin size)
upper = 300; %set highest level of histogram resolution (bin size)
qlow = -20; %set lowest moment exponent
qhigh = 20; %set highet moment exponent
qstep = 0.25; %set step size between moment exponents
qn= ((qhigh-qlow)/qstep) + 1; %calculates number of steps given qlow, qhigh, qstep
qvalues= linspace(qlow, qhigh, qn); %creates a vector of q values given above parameters
m = min(intel); %find the maximum of the dataset
M = max(intel); %find the minimum of the dataset
for Q = 1:length(qvalues) %loop over moment exponents q
for k = lower:upper %loop over bin sizes
counts = hist(intel, k); %unpack all k histogram height values into 'counts'
counts(counts==0) = []; %delete all zero values in ''counts
Zq = counts ./ length(intel);
Zq = Zq .^ qvalues(Q);
Zq = sum(Zq);
partitions(k-(lower-1), Q) = Zq; %store Zq in the kth row and the Qth column of 'partitions'
end
end
Your code seems to be generally bug-free but I made some changes since you perform needless repetitions over loops (I moved the outer loop inside and "vectorized" it since all moment calculations can be performed simultaneously for a given histogram. Also, it is building the histogram that takes longest).
intel = cumsum(randn(64,1)); % <-- mock random walk
Ni =length(intel);
%figure, plot(intel)
lower = 1; %set lowest level of histogram resolution (bin size)
upper = 300; %set highest level of histogram resolution (bin size)
qlow = -20; %set lowest moment exponent
qhigh = 20; %set highet moment exponent
qstep = 0.25; %set step size between moment exponents
qn= ((qhigh-qlow)/qstep) + 1; %calculates number of steps given qlow, qhigh, qstep
qvalues= linspace(qlow, qhigh, qn); %creates a vector of q values given above parameters
m = min(intel); %find the maximum of the dataset
M = max(intel); %find the minimum of the dataset
partitions = zeros(upper-lower+1,length(qvalues));
for k = lower:upper %loop over bin sizes
% (1) Select a bin size r and partition [m,M] into intervals of size r:
% [m, m+r), [m+r, m+2r), ..., [m+kr, M], where m+kr < M <= m+(k+1)r.
% Call these bins B0, ..., Bk.
edges = linspace(m,M,k+1);
edges(end)=Inf;
% (2) For each j, 0 <= j <= k, count the number of xi that lie in bin Bj. Call this number nj. Ignore all nj that equal 0 after all the xi have been counted..
counts = histc(intel, edges); %unpack all k histogram height values into 'counts'
counts(counts==0) = []; %delete all zero values in ''counts
% (3) Now compute the qth moment, Mrq = (n0/N)q + ... + (nk/N)q, where the sum is over all nonzero ni.
% Zq = counts/Ni;
partitions(k, :) = sum( (counts/Ni) .^ qvalues); %store Zq in the kth row and the Qth column of 'partitions'
end
figure, hold on
loglog(1./[1:k]', partitions(:,1),'g.-')
loglog(1./[1:k]', partitions(:,80),'b.-')
loglog(1./[1:k]', partitions(:,160),'r.-')
% (4) Perform linear regressions here to get alpha(r) ....

Multiply an arbitrary number of matrices an arbitrary number of times

I have found several questions/answers for vectorizing and speeding up routines for multiplying a matrix and a vector in a single loop, but I am trying to do something a little more general, namely multiplying an arbitrary number of matrices together, and then performing that operation an arbitrary number of times.
I am writing a general routine for calculating thin-film reflection from an arbitrary number of layers vs optical frequency. For each optical frequency W each layer has an index of refraction N and an associated 2x2 transfer matrix L and 2x2 interface matrix I which depends on the index of refraction and the thickness of the layer. If n is the number of layers, and m is the number of frequencies, then I can vectorize the index into an n x m matrix, but then in order to calculate the reflection at each frequency, I have to do nested loops. Since I am ultimately using this as part of a fitting routine, anything I can do to speed it up would be greatly appreciated.
This should provide a minimum working example:
W = 1260:0.1:1400; %frequency in cm^-1
N = rand(4,numel(W))+1i*rand(4,numel(W)); %dummy complex index of refraction
D = [0 0.1 0.2 0]/1e4; %thicknesses in cm
[n,m] = size(N);
r = zeros(size(W));
for x = 1:m %loop over frequencies
C = eye(2); % first medium is air
for y = 2:n %loop over layers
na = N(y-1,x);
nb = N(y,x);
%I = InterfaceMatrix(na,nb); % calculate the 2x2 interface matrix
I = [1 na*nb;na*nb 1]; % dummy matrix
%L = TransferMatrix(nb) % calculate the 2x2 transfer matrix
L = [exp(-1i*nb*W(x)*D(y)) 0; 0 exp(+1i*nb*W(x)*D(y))]; % dummy matrix
C = C*I*L;
end
a = C(1,1);
c = C(2,1);
r(x) = c/a; % reflectivity, the answer I want.
end
Running this twice for two different polarizations for a three layer (air/stuff/substrate) problem with 2562 frequencies takes 0.952 seconds while solving the exact same problem with the explicit formula (vectorized) for a three layer system takes 0.0265 seconds. The problem is that beyond 3 layers, the explicit formula rapidly becomes intractable and I would have to have a different subroutine for each number of layers while the above is completely general.
Is there hope for vectorizing this code or otherwise speeding it up?
(edited to add that I've left several things out of the code to shorten it, so please don't try to use this to actually calculate reflectivity)
Edit: In order to clarify, I and L are different for each layer and for each frequency, so they change in each loop. Simply taking the exponent will not work. For a real world example, take the simplest case of a soap bubble in air. There are three layers (air/soap/air) and two interfaces. For a given frequency, the full transfer matrix C is:
C = L_air * I_air2soap * L_soap * I_soap2air * L_air;
and I_air2soap ~= I_soap2air. Thus, I start with L_air = eye(2) and then go down successive layers, computing I_(y-1,y) and L_y, multiplying them with the result from the previous loop, and going on until I get to the bottom of the stack. Then I grab the first and third values, take the ratio, and that is the reflectivity at that frequency. Then I move on to the next frequency and do it all again.
I suspect that the answer is going to somehow involve a block-diagonal matrix for each layer as mentioned below.
Not next to a matlab, so that's only a starter,
Instead of the double loop you can write na*nb as Nab=N(1:end-1,:).*N(2:end,:);
The term in the exponent nb*W(x)*D(y) can be written as e=N(2:end,:)*W'*D;
The result of I*L is a 2x2 block matrix that has this form:
M = [1, Nab; Nab, 1]*[e-, 0;0, e+] = [e- , Nab*e+ ; Nab*e- , e+]
with e- as exp(-1i*e), and e+ as exp(1i*e)'
see kron on how to get the block matrix form, to vectorize the propagation C=C*I*L just take M^n
#Lama put me on the right path by suggesting block matrices, but the ultimate answer ended up being more complicated, and so I put it here for posterity. Since the transfer and interface matrix is different for each layer, I leave in the loop over the layers, but construct a large sparse block matrix where each block represents a frequency.
W = 1260:0.1:1400; %frequency in cm^-1
N = rand(4,numel(W))+1i*rand(4,numel(W)); %dummy complex index of refraction
D = [0 0.1 0.2 0]/1e4; %thicknesses in cm
[n,m] = size(N);
r = zeros(size(W));
C = speye(2*m); % first medium is air
even = 2:2:2*m;
odd = 1:2:2*m-1;
for y = 2:n %loop over layers
na = N(y-1,:);
nb = N(y,:);
% get the reflection and transmission coefficients from subroutines as a vector
% of length m, one value for each frequency
%t = Tab(na, nb);
%r = Rab(na, nb);
t = rand(size(W)); % dummy vector for MWE
r = rand(size(W)); % dummy vector for MWE
% create diagonal and off-diagonal elements. each block is [1 r;r 1]/t
Id(even) = 1./t;
Id(odd) = Id(even);
Io(even) = 0;
Io(odd) = r./t;
It = [Io;Id/2].';
I = spdiags(It,[-1 0],2*m,2*m);
I = I + I.';
b = 1i.*(2*pi*D(n).*nb).*W;
B(even) = -b;
B(odd) = b;
L = spdiags(exp(B).',0,2*m,2*m);
C = C*I*L;
end
a = spdiags(C,0);
a = a(odd).';
c = spdiags(C,-1);
c = c(odd).';
r = c./a; % reflectivity, the answer I want.
With the 3 layer system mentioned above, it isn't quite as fast as the explicit formula, but it's close and probably can get a little faster after some profiling. The full version of the original code clocks at 0.97 seconds, the formula at 0.012 seconds and the sparse diagonal version here at 0.065 seconds.