I'm not looking for a specific line a code - just built in functions or common packages that may help me do the following. Basically, something like, write up some code and use this function. I'm stuck on how to actually optimize - should I use SGD?
I have two variables, X, Y. I want to separate Y into 4 groups so that the L2, that is $(Xji | Yi - mean(Xji) | Yi)^2$ is minimized subject to the constraint that there are at least n observations in each group.
How would one go about solving this? I'd imagine you can't do this with the optim function? Basically the algo needs to move 3 values around (there are 3 cutoff points for Y) until L2 is minimized subject to n being a certain size.
Thanks
You could try optim and simply add a penalty if the constraints are not satisfied: since you minimise, add zero if all constraints are okay; otherwise a positive number.
If that does not work, since you only look for three cutoff points, I'd probably try a grid search, i.e. compute the objective function for different levels of the cutoff point; throw away those that violate the constraints, and then keep the best solution.
First off, apologies if there is a better way to format math equations, I could not find anything, but alas, the expressions are pretty short.
As part of an assigned problem I have to produce some code in C that will evaluate x^n/n! for an arbitrary x, and n = { 1-10 , 50, 100}
I can always brute force it with a large number library, but I am wondering if someone with better math skills then mine can suggest a better algorithm than something with a O(n!)...
I understand that I can split the numerator to x^(n/2)x^(n/2) for even values of n, and xx^(n-1/2)*x^(n-1/2) for odd values of n. And that I can further change that into a logarithm base x of n/2.
But I am stuck for multiple reasons:
1 - I do not think that computationally any of these changes actually make a lot of difference since they are not really helping me reduce the large number multiplications I have to perform, or their overall number.
2 - Even as I think of n! as 1*2*3*...*(n-1)*n, I still cannot rationalize a good way to simplify the overall equation.
3 - I have looked at Karatsuba's algorithm for multiplications, and although it is a possibility, it seems a bit complex for an intro to programming problem.
So I am wondering if you guys can think of any middle ground. I prefer explanations to straight answers if you have the time :)
Cheers,
My advice is to compute all the terms of the summation (put them in an array), and then sum them up in reverse order (i.e., smallest to largest) -- that reduces rounding error a little bit.
Note that you can compute the k-th term from the preceding one by multiplying by x/k -- you do not need to ever compute x^n or n! directly (this is important).
I am working on designing a new sensor, and so I have a vector of measured values and a vector of truth values. To represent error, it's simply measured - truth. Since there's a lot of variation in the truth, I would like to represent the normalized error. My initial thought would be error./truth to get percent error, but there are many cases where my truth value is zero! Can anyone think of a better way to represent the normalized data while avoiding the divide-by-zero? I'm working in Matlab, though the question is a bit language-agnostic as well.
PS, feel free to push this to another stackexchange if you think it's better suited
Try error = (measured-truth)/norm2(truth) for each vector.
Where norm2() is the forbenious norm.
norm2(x) =SQRT( SUM( x[i]^2, i=1..N ) )
This can only fail is all the values of truth are zero. You can mitigate this by adding a small positive number like 1e-12 to the norm, or to avoid the division when the norm is less than a threshold number.
I'd suggest you to separate results with zero (or smaller than 10e-6 for example) truth vector and non-zero truth vector. You can't treat it by the same means (since you can't normalize truth vector) and you should define what to do in that case.
I can't suggest you something specific because I don't know the problem statement, but you should define it by yourself how to deal with it. Or if you post your problem here I hope we can help you.
and we need to put these balls into boxes.
How many states of the states could there be?
This is part of a computer simulation puzzle. I've almost forget all my math knowledges.
I believe you are looking for the Multinomial Coefficient.
I will check myself and expand my answer.
Edit:
If you take a look at the wikipedia article I gave a link to, you can see that the M and N you defined in your question correspond to the m and n defined in the Theorem section.
This means that your question corresponds to: "What is the number of possible coefficient orderings when expanding a polynomial raised to an arbitrary power?", where N is the power, and M is the number of variables in the polynomial.
In other words:
What you are looking for is to sum over the multinomial coefficients of a polynomial of M variables expanded when raised to the power on N.
The exact equations are a bit long, but they are explained very clearly in wikipedia.
Why is this true:
The multinomial coefficient gives you the number of ways to order identical balls between baskets when grouped into a specific grouping (for example, 4 balls grouped into 3, 1, and 1 - in this case M=4 and N=3). When summing over all grouping options you get all possible combinations.
I hope this helped you out.
These notes explain how to solve the "balls in boxes" problem in general: whether the balls are labeled or not, whether the boxes are labeled or not, whether you have to have at least one ball in each box, etc.
this is a basic combinatorial question (distribution of identical objects into non identical slots)
the number of states is [(N+M-1) choose (M-1)]
Disclaimer
This is not strictly a programming question, but most programmers soon or later have to deal with math (especially algebra), so I think that the answer could turn out to be useful to someone else in the future.
Now the problem
I'm trying to check if m vectors of dimension n are linearly independent. If m == n you can just build a matrix using the vectors and check if the determinant is != 0. But what if m < n?
Any hints?
See also this video lecture.
Construct a matrix of the vectors (one row per vector), and perform a Gaussian elimination on this matrix. If any of the matrix rows cancels out, they are not linearly independent.
The trivial case is when m > n, in this case, they cannot be linearly independent.
Construct a matrix M whose rows are the vectors and determine the rank of M. If the rank of M is less than m (the number of vectors) then there is a linear dependence. In the algorithm to determine the rank of M you can stop the procedure as soon as you obtain one row of zeros, but running the algorithm to completion has the added bonanza of providing the dimension of the spanning set of the vectors. Oh, and the algorithm to determine the rank of M is merely Gaussian elimination.
Take care for numerical instability. See the warning at the beginning of chapter two in Numerical Recipes.
If m<n, you will have to do some operation on them (there are multiple possibilities: Gaussian elimination, orthogonalization, etc., almost any transformation which can be used for solving equations will do) and check the result (eg. Gaussian elimination => zero row or column, orthogonalization => zero vector, SVD => zero singular number)
However, note that this question is a bad question for a programmer to ask, and this problem is a bad problem for a program to solve. That's because every linearly dependent set of n<m vectors has a different set of linearly independent vectors nearby (eg. the problem is numerically unstable)
I have been working on this problem these days.
Previously, I have found some algorithms regarding Gaussian or Gaussian-Jordan elimination, but most of those algorithms only apply to square matrix, not general matrix.
To apply for general matrix, one of the best answers might be this:
http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Reduced_row_echelon_form#MATLAB
You can find both pseudo-code and source code in various languages.
As for me, I transformed the Python source code to C++, causes the C++ code provided in the above link is somehow complex and inappropriate to implement in my simulation.
Hope this will help you, and good luck ^^
If computing power is not a problem, probably the best way is to find singular values of the matrix. Basically you need to find eigenvalues of M'*M and look at the ratio of the largest to the smallest. If the ratio is not very big, the vectors are independent.
Another way to check that m row vectors are linearly independent, when put in a matrix M of size mxn, is to compute
det(M * M^T)
i.e. the determinant of a mxm square matrix. It will be zero if and only if M has some dependent rows. However Gaussian elimination should be in general faster.
Sorry man, my mistake...
The source code provided in the above link turns out to be incorrect, at least the python code I have tested and the C++ code I have transformed does not generates the right answer all the time. (while for the exmample in the above link, the result is correct :) -- )
To test the python code, simply replace the mtx with
[30,10,20,0],[60,20,40,0]
and the returned result would be like:
[1,0,0,0],[0,1,2,0]
Nevertheless, I have got a way out of this. It's just this time I transformed the matalb source code of rref function to C++. You can run matlab and use the type rref command to get the source code of rref.
Just notice that if you are working with some really large value or really small value, make sure use the long double datatype in c++. Otherwise, the result will be truncated and inconsistent with the matlab result.
I have been conducting large simulations in ns2, and all the observed results are sound.
hope this will help you and any other who have encontered the problem...
A very simple way, that is not the most computationally efficient, is to simply remove random rows until m=n and then apply the determinant trick.
m < n: remove rows (make the vectors shorter) until the matrix is square, and then
m = n: check if the determinant is 0 (as you said)
m < n (the number of vectors is greater than their length): they are linearly dependent (always).
The reason, in short, is that any solution to the system of m x n equations is also a solution to the n x n system of equations (you're trying to solve Av=0). For a better explanation, see Wikipedia, which explains it better than I can.