Consider the matrix:
M = [1.0 2.0 3.0; 5.0 4.0 3.0; 1.0 100.0 12.0]
I want to get column of the max value in each row.
So it should be:
col = [3; 1; 2]
, since
M[1,3] -> 3.0;
M[2,1] -> 5.0;
M[3,2] -> 100.00;
In Octave it is easy to achieve:
[max, col] = max(M,[],2)
, where col=[3;2;1].
In Julia I can find only findmax function which returns an absolute index of the max element for each row.
So it would be:
max, aindx = findmax(M,2)
, where aindx=[7,2,6]
M[7] = 3.0; M[2] = 5.0; M[6] = 100;
Where to find Julia equivelent for Octave max(M,[],2)?
My current workaround:
max, aindx = findmax(M, 2);
msize=size(M);
col = zeros(msize[1], 1);
for i=1:msize[1]
_, col[i] = ind2sub(msize,aindx[i]);
end
Julia's findmax is more flexible than Octave's max: you can find the maximum over multiple dimensions at once. As a consequence, it returns a linear index.
As you've noted, you can use ind2sub to compute whatever index(es) you want. If you use this a lot, you might want to define your "workaround" as a function to make it convenient to use. You can put that function in your .juliarc.jl if you want to make sure it's always available.
Related
I was working with Scilab and I decide to work with Julia however there are some errors which I didn't arrive to solve. For instance, I would like to fill out a vector using values of a given function but I got this error. Here is the code that I used:
using LinearAlgebra
A = [5/12 -1/12; 3/4 1/4]; c=[1/3;1]; b=[3/4; 1/4];
N = 10; T = 4; ts = (0:N)*T/N;
dt = T/N; λ = 10^(-14/(2*N+1));
m=length(c) ;
em0=b'/A # b^t * inv(A)
em1 = 1 .-em0*ones(m,1)
γ(z) =#. z/(1.0 -z*em1)
u_hat=complex(zeros(1,N+1));
u_hat[1]=γ(im)
The over-arching issue you are facing is that, coming from Scilab, you are probably not used to distinguishing scalars, vectors and matrices. Like in Matlab, Scilab scalars are really 1x1 matrices, and vectors are really Nx1 or 1xN matrices.
This is very different in Julia. A scalar is not the same as a 1x1 matrix, and a vector is not the same as a Nx1 matrix. You should therefore take care to distinguish them. In particular, you should avoid creating a matrix, zeros(M, 1), when what you really need is a vector, zeros(M).
The direct reason for the error message is that γ(im) is a matrix, because em1 is a matrix:
julia> γ(im)
1×1 Matrix{ComplexF64}:
0.0 + 1.0im
u_hat is also a matrix of ComplexF64, and you are trying to assign a matrix as one of its elements, which naturally won't work, only scalar values can be elements of a Matrix{ComplexF64}.
I took the liberty of writing a cleaned up version of your code:
A = [5/12 -1/12; 3/4 1/4]
# use commas when defining vectors (this is just about style)
b = [3/4, 1/4]
N = 10
## None of the below variables are used. Try to make your example minimal
c = [1/3, 1]
T = 4
dt = T/N;
ts = (0:N) .* dt
λ = 10^(-14/(2*N+1))
m = length(c)
############### <- not used
# prefer vectors over 1xN or Nx1 matrices
em0 = A' \ b
# dot product of a vector and a vector of ones is just a sum, but super-wasterful and slow.
em1 = 1 - sum(em0)
# don't use global variables(!!!), and remove the `#.`
γ(z, a) = z / (1 - z * a)
# use vectors, not 1xN matrices, and directly create a complex matrix instead of converting a real one.
û = zeros(ComplexF64, N+1)
# Now this works
û[1] = γ(im, em1)
I renamed u_hat to û for fun.
Also: remember to put your code in a function, always.
Just in the case of locating the root of the problem:
The problem is where you declared the em1 as em1 = 1 .-em0*ones(m,1). Since the output of the em0*ones(m,1) is expected to be a scalar, you can grasp it using the only function (I don't argue with your approach, and that's out of the interest of this answer):
julia> using LinearAlgebra
# Note that with this modification, there isn't any need for `#.` anymore.
julia> γ(z) = z/(1.0 -z*em1)
γ (generic function with 1 method)
julia> A = [5/12 -1/12; 3/4 1/4]; c=[1/3;1]; b=[3/4; 1/4];
N = 10; T = 4; ts = (0:N)*T/N;
dt = T/N; λ = 10^(-14/(2*N+1));
m=length(c);
em0=b'/A;
#This is where the problem can be solved
em1 = 1 - only(em0*ones(m,1));
u_hat=complex(zeros(1,N+1));
u_hat[1]=γ(im)
0.0 + 1.0im
julia> u_hat
1×11 Matrix{ComplexF64}:
0.0+1.0im 0.0+0.0im 0.0+0.0im 0.0+0.0im 0.0+0.0im … 0.0+0.0im 0.0+0.0im 0.0+0.0im 0.0+0.0im 0.0+0.0im
Following up How to add vectors to the columns of some array in Julia?, I would like to have some analogous clarifications for DataArrays.
Let y=randn(100, 2). I would like to create a matrix x with the lagged value (with lags > 0) of y. I have already written a code which it seems is working properly (see below). I was wondering if there is a better way for concatenating a DataArray than the one I have used.
T, n = size(y);
x = #data(zeros(T-lags, 0));
for lag in 1:lags
x = hcat(x, y[lags-lag+1:end-lag, :]);
end
Unless there is a specific reason to do otherwise, my recommendation would be to start with your DataArray x being the size that you want it to be and then fill in the column values you want.
This will give you better performance than if you need to recreate the DataArray for each new column, which is what any method for "adding" columns will actually be doing. It's conceivable that the DataArray package might have some more pretty syntax for it than what you have in your question, but fundamentally, that's what it would still be doing.
Thus, in a simplified version of your example, I would recommend:
using DataArrays
N = 5; T = 10;
X = #data(zeros(T, N));
initial_data_cols = 2; ## specify how much of the initial data is filled in
lags = size(X,2) - initial_data_cols
X[:,1:initial_data_cols] = rand(size(X,1), initial_data_cols) ## First two columns of X are fixed in advance
for lag in 1:lags
X[:,(lag+initial_data_cols)] = rand(size(X,1))
end
If you did find yourself in a situation where you need to add columns to an already created object, you could improve somewhat upon the code that you have by first creating all of the new objects together and then doing a single addition of them to your initial DataArray. E.g.
X = #data(zeros(10, 2))
X = [X rand(10,3)]
For instance, consider the difference in execution time, and number and quantity of memory allocations in the two examples below:
n = 10^5; m = 10;
A = #data rand(n,m);
n_newcol = 10;
function t1(A::Array, n_newcol)
n = size(A,1)
for idx = 1:n_newcol
A = hcat(A, zeros(n))
end
return A
end
function t2(A::Array, n_newcol)
n = size(A,1)
[A zeros(n, n_newcol)]
end
# Stats after running each function once to compile
#time r1 = t1(A, n_newcol); ## 0.154082 seconds (124 allocations: 125.888 MB, 75.33% gc time)
#time r2 = t2(A, n_newcol); ## 0.007981 seconds (9 allocations: 22.889 MB, 31.73% gc time)
I'm using Julia 0.3.4
I'm trying to write LU-decomposition using Gaussian elimination. So I have to swap rows. And here's my problem:
If I'm using a,b = b,a I get an error,
but if I'm using:
function swapRows(row1, row2)
temp = row1
row1 = row2
row2 = temp
end
then everything works just fine.
Am I doing something wrong or it's a bug?
Here's my source code:
function lu_t(A::Matrix)
# input value: (A), where A is a matrix
# return value: (L,U), where L,U are matrices
function swapRows(row1, row2)
temp = row1
row1 = row2
row2 = temp
return null
end
if size(A)[1] != size(A)[2]
throw(DimException())
end
n = size(A)[1] # matrix dimension
U = copy(A) # upper triangular matrix
L = eye(n) # lower triangular matrix
for k = 1:n-1 # direct Gaussian elimination for each column `k`
(val,id) = findmax(U[k:end,k]) # find max pivot element and it's row `id`
if val == 0 # check matrix for singularity
throw(SingularException())
end
swapRows(U[k,k:end],U[id,k:end]) # swap row `k` and `id`
# U[k,k:end],U[id,k:end] = U[id,k:end],U[k,k:end] - error
for i = k+1:n # for each row `i` > `k`
μ = U[i,k] / U[k,k] # find elimination coefficient `μ`
L[i,k] = μ # save to an appropriate position in lower triangular matrix `L`
for j = k:n # update each value of the row `i`
U[i,j] = U[i,j] - μ⋅U[k,j]
end
end
end
return (L,U)
end
###### main code ######
A = rand(4,4)
#time (L,U) = lu_t(A)
#test_approx_eq(L*U, A)
The swapRows function is a no-op and has no effect whatsoever – all it does is swap around some local variable names. See various discussions of the difference between assignment and mutation:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/julia-users/oSW5hH8vxAo/llAHRvvFVhMJ
http://julia.readthedocs.org/en/latest/manual/faq/#i-passed-an-argument-x-to-a-function-modified-it-inside-that-function-but-on-the-outside-the-variable-x-is-still-unchanged-why
http://julia.readthedocs.org/en/latest/manual/faq/#why-does-x-y-allocate-memory-when-x-and-y-are-arrays
The constant null doesn't mean what you think it does – in Julia v0.3 it's a function that computes the null space of a linear transformation; in Julia v0.4 it still means this but has been deprecated and renamed to nullspace. The "uninteresting" value in Julia is called nothing.
I'm not sure what's wrong with your commented out row swapping code, but this general approach does work:
julia> X = rand(3,4)
3x4 Array{Float64,2}:
0.149066 0.706264 0.983477 0.203822
0.478816 0.0901912 0.810107 0.675179
0.73195 0.756805 0.345936 0.821917
julia> X[1,:], X[2,:] = X[2,:], X[1,:]
(
1x4 Array{Float64,2}:
0.478816 0.0901912 0.810107 0.675179,
1x4 Array{Float64,2}:
0.149066 0.706264 0.983477 0.203822)
julia> X
3x4 Array{Float64,2}:
0.478816 0.0901912 0.810107 0.675179
0.149066 0.706264 0.983477 0.203822
0.73195 0.756805 0.345936 0.821917
Since this creates a pair of temporary arrays that we can't yet eliminate the allocation of, this isn't the most efficient approach. If you want the most efficient code here, looping over the two rows and swapping pairs of scalar values will be faster:
function swapRows!(X, i, j)
for k = 1:size(X,2)
X[i,k], X[j,k] = X[j,k], X[i,k]
end
end
Note that it is conventional in Julia to name functions that mutate one or more of their arguments with a trailing !. Currently, closures (i.e. inner functions) have some performance issues, so you'll want such a helper function to be defined at the top-level scope instead of inside of another function the way you've got it.
Finally, I assume this is an exercise since Julia ships with carefully tuned generic (i.e. it works for arbitrary numeric types) LU decomposition: http://docs.julialang.org/en/release-0.3/stdlib/linalg/#Base.lu.
-
It's quite simple
julia> A = rand(3,4)
3×4 Array{Float64,2}:
0.241426 0.283391 0.201864 0.116797
0.457109 0.138233 0.346372 0.458742
0.0940065 0.358259 0.260923 0.578814
julia> A[[1,2],:] = A[[2,1],:]
2×4 Array{Float64,2}:
0.457109 0.138233 0.346372 0.458742
0.241426 0.283391 0.201864 0.116797
julia> A
3×4 Array{Float64,2}:
0.457109 0.138233 0.346372 0.458742
0.241426 0.283391 0.201864 0.116797
0.0940065 0.358259 0.260923 0.578814
I have the image and the vector
a = imread('Lena.tiff');
v = [0,2,5,8,10,12,15,20,25];
and this M-file
function y = Funks(I, gama, c)
[m n] = size(I);
for i=1:m
for j=1:n
J(i, j) = (I(i, j) ^ gama) * c;
end
end
y = J;
imshow(y);
when I'm trying to do this:
f = Funks(a,v,2)
I am getting this error:
??? Error using ==> mpower
Integers can only be combined with integers of the same class, or scalar doubles.
Error in ==> Funks at 5
J(i, j) = (I(i, j) ^ gama) * c;
Can anybody help me, with this please?
The error is caused because you're trying to raise a number to a vector power. Translated (i.e. replacing formal arguments with actual arguments in the function call), it would be something like:
J(i, j) = (a(i, j) ^ [0,2,5,8,10,12,15,20,25]) * 2
Element-wise power .^ won't work either, because you'll try to "stuck" a vector into a scalar container.
Later edit: If you want to apply each gamma to your image, maybe this loop is more intuitive (though not the most efficient):
a = imread('Lena.tiff'); % Pics or GTFO
v = [0,2,5,8,10,12,15,20,25]; % Gamma (ar)ray -- this will burn any picture
f = cell(1, numel(v)); % Prepare container for your results
for k=1:numel(v)
f{k} = Funks(a, v(k), 2); % Save result from your function
end;
% (Afterwards you use cell array f for further processing)
Or you may take a look at the other (more efficient if maybe not clearer) solutions posted here.
Later(er?) edit: If your tiff file is CYMK, then the result of imread is a MxNx4 color matrix, which must be handled differently than usual (because it 3-dimensional).
There are two ways I would follow:
1) arrayfun
results = arrayfun(#(i) I(:).^gama(i)*c,1:numel(gama),'UniformOutput',false);
J = cellfun(#(x) reshape(x,size(I)),results,'UniformOutput',false);
2) bsxfun
results = bsxfun(#power,I(:),gama)*c;
results = num2cell(results,1);
J = cellfun(#(x) reshape(x,size(I)),results,'UniformOutput',false);
What you're trying to do makes no sense mathematically. You're trying to assign a vector to a number. Your problem is not the MATLAB programming, it's in the definition of what you're trying to do.
If you're trying to produce several images J, each of which corresponds to a certain gamma applied to the image, you should do it as follows:
function J = Funks(I, gama, c)
[m n] = size(I);
% get the number of images to produce
k = length(gama);
% Pre-allocate the output
J = zeros(m,n,k);
for i=1:m
for j=1:n
J(i, j, :) = (I(i, j) .^ gama) * c;
end
end
In the end you will get images J(:,:,1), J(:,:,2), etc.
If this is not what you want to do, then figure out your equations first.
I have two p*n arrays, y and ymiss. y contains real numbers and NA's. ymiss contains 1's and 0's, so that if y(i,j)==NA, ymiss(i,j)==0, and 1 otherwise. I also have 1*n array ydim which tells how many real numbers there is at y(1:p,n), so ydim has values 0 to p
In R programming language, I can do following:
if(ydim!=p && ydim!=0)
y(1:ydim(t), t) = y(ymiss(,t), t)
That code arranges all real numbers of y(,t) in like this
first there's for example
y(,t) = (3,1,NA,6,2,NA)
after the code it's
y(,t) = (3,1,6,2,2,NA)
Now I will only need those first 1:ydim(t), so it doesn't matter what those rest are.
The question is, how can I do something like that in Fortran?
Thanks,
Jouni
The "where statement" and the "merge" intrinsic function are powerful, operating on selected positions in arrays, but they don't move items to the front of an array. With old-fashioned code with explicit indexing (could be packaged into a function) e.g.:
k=1
do i=1, n
if (ymiss (i) == 1) then
y(k) = y(i)
k = k + 1
end if
end do
What you want could be done with array intrinsics using the "pack" intrinsic. Convert ymiss into a logical array: 0 --> .false., 1 --> .true.. Then use code like (tested without the second index):
y(1:ydim(t), t) = pack (y (:,t), ymiss (:,t))
Edit to add example code, showing use of Fortran intrinsics "where", "count" and "pack". "where" alone can't solve the problem, but "pack" can. I used "< -90" as NaN for this example. The step "y (ydim+1:LEN) = -99.0" isn't required by the OP, who doesn't need to use these elements.
program test1
integer, parameter :: LEN = 6
real, dimension (1:LEN) :: y = [3.0, 1.0, -99.0, 6.0, 2.0, -99.0 ]
real, dimension (1:LEN) :: y2
logical, dimension (1:LEN) :: ymiss
integer :: ydim
y2 = y
write (*, '(/ "The input array:" / 6(F6.1) )' ) y
where (y < -90.0)
ymiss = .false.
elsewhere
ymiss = .true.
end where
ydim = count (ymiss)
where (ymiss) y2 = y
write (*, '(/ "Masking with where does not rearrange:" / 6(F6.1) )' ) y2
y (1:ydim) = pack (y, ymiss)
y (ydim+1:LEN) = -99.0
write (*, '(/ "After using pack, and ""erasing"" the end:" / 6(F6.1) )' ) y
stop
end program test1
Output is:
The input array:
3.0 1.0 -99.0 6.0 2.0 -99.0
Masking with where does not rearrange:
3.0 1.0 -99.0 6.0 2.0 -99.0
After using pack, and "erasing" the end:
3.0 1.0 6.0 2.0 -99.0 -99.0
In Fortran you can't store na in an array of real numbers, you can only store real numbers. So you'll probably want to replace na's with some value not likely to be present in your data: huge() might be suitable. 2D arrays are no problem at all for Fortan. You might want to use a 2D array of logicals to replace ymiss rather than a 2D array of 1s and 0s.
There is no simple, intrinsic to achieve what you want, you'd need to write a function. However, a more Fortran way of doing things would be to use the array of logicals as a mask for the operations you want to carry out.
So, here's some fragmentary Fortran code, not tested:
! Declarations
real(8), dimension(m,n) :: y, ynew
logical, dimension(m,n) :: ymiss
! Executable
where (ymiss) ynew = func(y) ! here func() is whatever your function is