There is a system of 3 linear equations composing of matrices which are represented by RGB image. Say
A = A1*x1 + A2*x2 + A3*x3 ......(Eq 1)
B= A1*x4 + A2*x5 + A3*x6 ........(Eq 2)
C= A1*x7 + A2*x8 + A3*x9 ........(Eq 3)
each are of equal dimension say 3D. I performed the following
A11=rgb2gray(A1);
x11=rgb2gray(x1);
A11 =double(A1) ; x11 = double(x11); b = A1*x1;
opts.UT = true; opts.TRANSA = false;
y1 = linsolve(x1,b,opts);
imshow(y1);
% The objective is to obtain A1,A2,A3
On doing this, following issues have surfaced:
1. Error
The output y1 is not the same as A1, which should have been. Why is it so? Please help
The R,G and B spaces are orthogonal. So you can solve each of those sets independently. The problem here is that mtimes, which is your matrix multiplication operator, doesn't accept 3D inputs.
To solve this, you can loop through each of R, G and B and use linsolve for each of the resulting 2D matrices. Normally, I wouldn't recommend loops for anything in MATLAB, but here, there won't be any discernable overhead as there are only 3 iterations in the loop.
Your answer will not be any different from what it would be if you were to solve them all in one go (if that were possible), because the three spaces are independent.
EDIT
The way you've written your equations, the xi's form the coefficient matrix and Ai's are the unknowns. The system of equations can be written compactly as XY=Z, where X is a 3D matrix composed of the coefficients, xi for each color space,RGB; Y is a 2D matrix, with a vector [A1, A2, A3]' in each color space, and Z is also a 2D matrix with vectors [A, B, C]' in each color space.
Assuming that the colorspace is the last dimension, you can try
[xPixels,yPixels,colorSpace]=size(X);
Y=zeros(yPixels,colorspace);
opts.UT=true; opts.TRANSA=false;
for i=1:colorspace
Y(:,i)=linsolve(X(:,:,i),Z(:,i),opts);
end
You'll have to setup the matrices X, Y and Z according to your problem. It is helpful to keep the looped dimension (in this case, colorspace) as the outermost dimension, as otherwise, you'll have to use squeeze to remove the singleton dimensions.
Related
I have a matrix of A=[60x60],and two coefficients a,b. Since matrix A was moved by a,b, how to multiply the coefficients into matrix A so that I could obtain A_moved? Any function to do it?
Here's part of matlab code implemented:
A=rand(60); %where it's in 2D, A(k1,k2)
a=0.5; b=0.8;
[m, n]=size(A);
[M,N] = meshgrid(1:m,1:n);
X = [M(:), N(:)];
A_moved=A(:)(X)*[a b] %I know this is not valid but you get the idea
In another word A_moved is calculated by A_moved=a*k1+b*k2.
This line of code A_moved=A(:)(X)*[a b] is to represent my idea that a,b multiply back into the original A because X represent correspond coordinates of k1 and k2. The first column represent k1, and second column represent k2. Thus it become A_moved=a*k1+b*k2. But this couldn't get me anyway.
In the end A-moved is a 60x60 matrix which have been multiplied by coefficients a,b correspondingly. To make it clearer,A is the phase of image. a,b moved it phase.
Appreciate any help. Thank you!
Reference paper: Here
EDIT:
As suggested by Noel for better understanding.
A=[2 3;5 7], a=1.5 and b=2.5.
Since A is approximated as a*k1+b*k2
Thus,
A_moved=[1.5*k1_1+2.5k2_1 1.5*k1_2+2.5k2_2; 1.5*k1_2+2.5k2_1 1.5*k1_2+2.5k2_2];
where k1 and k2, If I'm understood correctly is the coordinates of the original A matrix, as defined in X above.
On the chat we found that your problem was matrix algebra related
What you want to obtain in A_moved is the x coordinate multiplied by a contant a plus the y coordinate multiplied by a constant b.
You already have this coordinates in M and N, so you can obtain A_moved as
A_moved = (a*M) + (b*N);
And it will retain same shape as A
I have two images which one of them is the Original image and the second one is Transformed image.
I have to find out how many degrees Transformed image was rotated using 3x3 transformation matrix. Plus, I need to find how far translated from origin.
Both images are grayscaled and held in matrix variables. Their sizes are same [350 500].
I have found a few lecture notes like this.
Lecture notes say that I should use the following matrix formula for rotation:
For translation matrix the formula is given:
Everything is good. But there are two problems:
I could not imagine how to implement the formulas using MATLAB.
The formulas are shaped to find x',y' values but I already have got x,x',y,y' values. I need to find rotation angle (theta) and tx and ty.
I want to know the equivailence of x, x', y, y' in the the matrix.
I have got the following code:
rotationMatrix = [ cos(theta) sin(theta) 0 ; ...
-sin(theta) cos(theta) 0 ; ...
0 0 1];
translationMatrix = [ 1 0 tx; ...
0 1 ty; ...
0 0 1];
But as you can see, tx, ty, theta variables are not defined before used. How can I calculate theta, tx and ty?
PS: It is forbidden to use Image Processing Toolbox functions.
This is essentially a homography recovery problem. What you are doing is given co-ordinates in one image and the corresponding co-ordinates in the other image, you are trying to recover the combined translation and rotation matrix that was used to warp the points from the one image to the other.
You can essentially combine the rotation and translation into a single matrix by multiplying the two matrices together. Multiplying is simply compositing the two operations together. You would this get:
H = [cos(theta) -sin(theta) tx]
[sin(theta) cos(theta) ty]
[ 0 0 1]
The idea behind this is to find the parameters by minimizing the error through least squares between each pair of points.
Basically, what you want to find is the following relationship:
xi_after = H*xi_before
H is the combined rotation and translation matrix required to map the co-ordinates from the one image to the other. H is also a 3 x 3 matrix, and knowing that the lower right entry (row 3, column 3) is 1, it makes things easier. Also, assuming that your points are in the augmented co-ordinate system, we essentially want to find this relationship for each pair of co-ordinates from the first image (x_i, y_i) to the other (x_i', y_i'):
[p_i*x_i'] [h11 h12 h13] [x_i]
[p_i*y_i'] = [h21 h22 h23] * [y_i]
[ p_i ] [h31 h32 1 ] [ 1 ]
The scale of p_i is to account for homography scaling and vanishing points. Let's perform a matrix-vector multiplication of this equation. We can ignore the 3rd element as it isn't useful to us (for now):
p_i*x_i' = h11*x_i + h12*y_i + h13
p_i*y_i' = h21*x_i + h22*y_i + h23
Now let's take a look at the 3rd element. We know that p_i = h31*x_i + h32*y_i + 1. As such, substituting p_i into each of the equations, and rearranging to solve for x_i' and y_i', we thus get:
x_i' = h11*x_i + h12*y_i + h13 - h31*x_i*x_i' - h32*y_i*x_i'
y_i' = h21*x_i + h22*y_i + h23 - h31*x_i*y_i' - h32*y_i*y_i'
What you have here now are two equations for each unique pair of points. What we can do now is build an over-determined system of equations. Take each pair and build two equations out of them. You will then put it into matrix form, i.e.:
Ah = b
A would be a matrix of coefficients that were built from each set of equations using the co-ordinates from the first image, b would be each pair of points for the second image and h would be the parameters you are solving for. Ultimately, you are finally solving this linear system of equations reformulated in matrix form:
You would solve for the vector h which can be performed through least squares. In MATLAB, you can do this via:
h = A \ b;
A sidenote for you: If the movement between images is truly just a rotation and translation, then h31 and h32 will both be zero after we solve for the parameters. However, I always like to be thorough and so I will solve for h31 and h32 anyway.
NB: This method will only work if you have at least 4 unique pairs of points. Because there are 8 parameters to solve for, and there are 2 equations per point, A must have at least a rank of 8 in order for the system to be consistent (if you want to throw in some linear algebra terminology in the loop). You will not be able to solve this problem if you have less than 4 points.
If you want some MATLAB code, let's assume that your points are stored in sourcePoints and targetPoints. sourcePoints are from the first image and targetPoints are for the second image. Obviously, there should be the same number of points between both images. It is assumed that both sourcePoints and targetPoints are stored as M x 2 matrices. The first columns contain your x co-ordinates while the second columns contain your y co-ordinates.
numPoints = size(sourcePoints, 1);
%// Cast data to double to be sure
sourcePoints = double(sourcePoints);
targetPoints = double(targetPoints);
%//Extract relevant data
xSource = sourcePoints(:,1);
ySource = sourcePoints(:,2);
xTarget = targetPoints(:,1);
yTarget = targetPoints(:,2);
%//Create helper vectors
vec0 = zeros(numPoints, 1);
vec1 = ones(numPoints, 1);
xSourcexTarget = -xSource.*xTarget;
ySourcexTarget = -ySource.*xTarget;
xSourceyTarget = -xSource.*yTarget;
ySourceyTarget = -ySource.*yTarget;
%//Build matrix
A = [xSource ySource vec1 vec0 vec0 vec0 xSourcexTarget ySourcexTarget; ...
vec0 vec0 vec0 xSource ySource vec1 xSourceyTarget ySourceyTarget];
%//Build RHS vector
b = [xTarget; yTarget];
%//Solve homography by least squares
h = A \ b;
%// Reshape to a 3 x 3 matrix (optional)
%// Must transpose as reshape is performed
%// in column major format
h(9) = 1; %// Add in that h33 is 1 before we reshape
hmatrix = reshape(h, 3, 3)';
Once you are finished, you have a combined rotation and translation matrix. If you want the x and y translations, simply pick off column 3, rows 1 and 2 in hmatrix. However, we can also work with the vector of h itself, and so h13 would be element 3, and h23 would be element number 6. If you want the angle of rotation, simply take the appropriate inverse trigonometric function to rows 1, 2 and columns 1, 2. For the h vector, this would be elements 1, 2, 4 and 5. There will be a bit of inconsistency depending on which elements you choose as this was solved by least squares. One way to get a good overall angle would perhaps be to find the angles of all 4 elements then do some sort of average. Either way, this is a good starting point.
References
I learned about homography a while ago through Leow Wee Kheng's Computer Vision course. What I have told you is based on his slides: http://www.comp.nus.edu.sg/~cs4243/lecture/camera.pdf. Take a look at slides 30-32 if you want to know where I pulled this material from. However, the MATLAB code I wrote myself :)
I have some data points to which I need to fit an exponential curve of the form
y = B * exp(A/x)
(without the help of Curve Fitting Toolbox).
What I have tried so far to linearize the model by applying log, which results in
log(y/B) = A/x
log(y) = A/x + log(B)
I can then write it in the form
Y = AX + B
Now, if I neglect B, then I am able to solve it with
A = pseudoinverse (X) * Y
but I am stuck with values of B...
Fitting a curve of the form
y = b * exp(a / x)
to some data points (xi, yi) in the least-squares sense is difficult. You cannot use linear least-squares for that, because the model parameters (a and b) do not appear in an affine manner in the equation. Unless you're ready to use some nonlinear-least-squares method, an alternative approach is to modify the optimization problem so that the modified problem can be solved using linear least squares (this process is sometimes called "data linearization"). Let's do that.
Under the assumption that b and the yi's be positive, you can apply the natural logarithm to both sides of the equations:
log(y) = log(b) + a / x
or
a / x + log(b) = log(y)
By introducing a new parameter b2, defined as log(b), it becomes evident that parameters a and b2 appear in a linear (affine, really) manner in the new equation:
a / x + b2 = log(y)
Therefore, you can compute the optimal values of those parameters using least squares; all you have left to do is construct the right linear system and then solve it using MATLAB's backslash operator:
A = [1 ./ x, ones(size(x))];
B = log(y);
params_ls = A \ B;
(I'm assuming x and y are column vectors, here.)
Then, the optimal values (in the least-squares sense) for the modified problem are given by:
a_ls = params_ls(1);
b_ls = exp(params_ls(2));
Although those values are not, in general, optimal for the original problem, they are often "good enough" in practice. If needed, you can always use them as initial guesses for some iterative nonlinear-least-squares method.
Doing the log transform then using linear regression should do it. Wikipedia has a nice section on how to do this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_least_squares_%28mathematics%29#The_general_problem
%MATLAB code for finding the best fit line using least squares method
x=input('enter a') %input in the form of matrix, rows contain points
a=[1,x(1,1);1,x(2,1);1,x(3,1)] %forming A of Ax=b
b=[x(1,2);x(2,2);x(3,2)] %forming b of Ax=b
yy=inv(transpose(a)*a)*transpose(a)*b %computing projection of matrix A on b, giving x
%plotting the best fit line
xx=linspace(1,10,50);
y=yy(1)+yy(2)*xx;
plot(xx,y)
%plotting the points(data) for which we found the best fit line
hold on
plot(x(2,1),x(2,2),'x')
hold on
plot(x(1,1),x(1,2),'x')
hold on
plot(x(3,1),x(3,2),'x')
hold off
I'm sure the code can be cleaned up, but that's the gist of it.
I'm trying to reconstruct a 3d image from two calibrated cameras. One of the steps involved is to calculate the 3x3 essential matrix E, from two sets of corresponding (homogeneous) points (more than the 8 required) P_a_orig and P_b_orig and the two camera's 3x3 internal calibration matrices K_a and K_b.
We start off by normalizing our points with
P_a = inv(K_a) * p_a_orig
and
P_b = inv(K_b) * p_b_orig
We also know the constraint
P_b' * E * P_a = 0
I'm following it this far, but how do you actually solve that last problem, e.g. finding the nine values of the E matrix? I've read several different lecture notes on this subject, but they all leave out that crucial last step. Likely because it is supposedly trivial math, but I can't remember when I last did this and I haven't been able to find a solution yet.
This equation is actually pretty common in geometry algorithms, essentially, you are trying to calculate the matrix X from the equation AXB=0. To solve this, you vectorise the equation, which means,
vec() means vectorised form of a matrix, i.e., simply stack the coloumns of the matrix one over the another to produce a single coloumn vector. If you don't know the meaning of the scary looking symbol, its called Kronecker product and you can read it from here, its easy, trust me :-)
Now, say I call the matrix obtained by Kronecker product of B^T and A as C.
Then, vec(X) is the null vector of the matrix C and the way to obtain that is by doing the SVD decomposition of C^TC (C transpose multiplied by C) and take the the last coloumn of the matrix V. This last coloumn is nothing but your vec(X). Reshape X to 3 by 3 matrix. This is you Essential matrix.
In case you find this maths too daunting to code, simply use the following code by Y.Ma et.al:
% p are homogenius coordinates of the first image of size 3 by n
% q are homogenius coordinates of the second image of size 3 by n
function [E] = essentialDiscrete(p,q)
n = size(p);
NPOINTS = n(2);
% set up matrix A such that A*[v1,v2,v3,s1,s2,s3,s4,s5,s6]' = 0
A = zeros(NPOINTS, 9);
if NPOINTS < 9
error('Too few mesurements')
return;
end
for i = 1:NPOINTS
A(i,:) = kron(p(:,i),q(:,i))';
end
r = rank(A);
if r < 8
warning('Measurement matrix rank defficient')
T0 = 0; R = [];
end;
[U,S,V] = svd(A);
% pick the eigenvector corresponding to the smallest eigenvalue
e = V(:,9);
e = (round(1.0e+10*e))*(1.0e-10);
% essential matrix
E = reshape(e, 3, 3);
You can do several things:
The Essential matrix can be estimated using the 8-point algorithm, which you can implement yourself.
You can use the estimateFundamentalMatrix function from the Computer Vision System Toolbox, and then get the Essential matrix from the Fundamental matrix.
Alternatively, you can calibrate your stereo camera system using the estimateCameraParameters function in the Computer Vision System Toolbox, which will compute the Essential matrix for you.
I have a 1000 5x5 matrices (Xm) like this:
Each $(x_ij)m$ is a point estimate drawn from a distribution. I'd like to calculate the covariance cov of each $x{ij}$, where i=1..n, and j=1..n in the direction of the red arrow.
For example the variance of $X_m$ is `var(X,0,3) which gives a 5x5 matrix of variances. Can I calculate the covariance in the same way?
Attempt at answer
So far I've done this:
for m=1:1000
Xm_new(m,:)=reshape(Xm(:,:,m)',25,1);
end
cov(Xm_new)
spy(Xm_new) gives me this unusual looking sparse matrix:
If you look at cov (edit cov in the command window) you might see why it doesn't support multi-dimensional arrays. It perform a transpose and a matrix multiplication of the input matrices: xc' * xc. Both operations don't support multi-dimensional arrays and I guess whoever wrote the function decided not to do the work to generalize it (it still might be good to contact the Mathworks however and make a feature request).
In your case, if we take the basic code from cov and make a few assumptions, we can write a covariance function M-file the supports 3-D arrays:
function x = cov3d(x)
% Based on Matlab's cov, version 5.16.4.10
[m,n,p] = size(x);
if m == 1
x = zeros(n,n,p,class(x));
else
x = bsxfun(#minus,x,sum(x,1)/m);
for i = 1:p
xi = x(:,:,i);
x(:,:,i) = xi'*xi;
end
x = x/(m-1);
end
Note that this simple code assumes that x is a series of 2-D matrices stacked up along the third dimension. And the normalization flag is 0, the default in cov. It could be exapnded to multiple dimensions like var with a bit of work. In my timings, it's over 10 times faster than a function that calls cov(x(:,:,i)) in a for loop.
Yes, I used a for loop. There may or may not be faster ways to do this, but in this case for loops are going to be faster than most schemes, especially when the size of your array is not known a priori.
The answer below also works for a rectangular matrix xi=x(:,:,i)
function xy = cov3d(x)
[m,n,p] = size(x);
if m == 1
x = zeros(n,n,p,class(x));
else
xc = bsxfun(#minus,x,sum(x,1)/m);
for i = 1:p
xci = xc(:,:,i);
xy(:,:,i) = xci'*xci;
end
xy = xy/(m-1);
end
My answer is very similar to horchler, however horchler's code does not work with rectangular matrices xi (whose dimensions are different from xi'*xi dimensions).