I want to find a function that approximates a function that produces output that looks like:
Blue, Red and Green are the X, Y and Z space dimensions.
What R package should I use?
I realize this question is very old, but has it been resolved yet for you?
First the short answer: You should use
Library TuneR for the function periodogram()
Library strucchange for the function Wave() with which you build an object that will plot nicely
Considering your comment about losing information if you apply a fourier-transform on the 3 dimensions separately instead of, say, on the vector for each point in time: You will lose information anyway in the fourier-transform. The best you can do is make sure the axes are orthogonal. Looking at your data, even running the fourier over only one dimension will give you the major frequency without problems.
Related
I'm trying to plot some measurements over time with a best-fit curve, using Julia's plotting tools. There's already a fairly good answer how to do this with a simple numeric data series:
Julia: How to find best fit curve / equation when I have a plot?
However, these tools (well - at least the Polynomials package) do not like being given Date values. I imagine some sort of conversion from Dates into a numeric value needs to be done, but I want the resulting plots to retain their scales in date units, which would need a conversion back again.
I suspect this is a fairly common problem and there must be an elegant way to solve it, but being new to Julia I would like to ask for some pointers to what a good solution looks like?
Thanks!
Is there a way of calculating or estimating the area under the curve as an external metric, using base R, from confusion matrices alone?
If not, how would I do it, given the clustering object?
e.g. we can start from
cutree(hclust(dist(iris[,1:4])),method="average"),3))
or, from a diagonal-maximized version of
table(iris$Species, cutree(hclust(dist(iris[,1:4])),method="average"),3))
the latter being the confusion matrix. I would much, much prefer a solution that goes from the confusion matrix but if it's impossible we can use the clustering object itself.
I read the comments here: Calculate AUC in R? -- the top solution looks good, but it's unclear to me how to generalise it for multi-class data like iris.
(No packages, obviously, I want to find out how to do it by hand in base R)
Could you please help me to add zooming option for wordcloud
Please find reproducible example #
´http://shiny.rstudio.com/gallery/word-cloud.html´
I tried to incorporate rbokeh and plotly but couldnt find wordcloud equivalent render function
Additionally, I found ECharts from github #
´https://github.com/XD-DENG/ECharts2Shiny/tree/8ac690a8039abc2334ec06f394ba97498b518e81´
But incorporating this ECharts are also not convenient for really zoom.
Thanks in advance,
Abi
Normalisation is required only if the predictors are not meant to be comparable on the original scaling. There's no rule that says you must normalize.
PCA is a statistical method that gives you a new linear transformation. By itself, it loses nothing. All it does is to give you new principal components.
You lose information only if you choose a subset of those principal components.
Usually PCA includes centering the data as a Pre Process Step.
PCA only arranges the data in its own Axis (Eigne Vectors) System.
If you use all axis you lose no information.
Yet, usually we want to apply Dimensionality Reduction, intuitively, having less coordinates for the data.
This process means projecting the data into Sub Space which is spanned by only some of the Eigen Vectors of the data.
If one chose wisely the number of vectors one might end up with a significant reduction in the number of dimensions of the data with negligible loss of data / information.
The way to do so is by choosing Eigen Vectors which their Eigen Values sum to most of the data power.
PCA itself is invertible, so lossless.
But:
It is common to drop some components, which will cause a loss of information.
Numerical issues may cause a loss in precision.
We do a lot of full field 3D numerical simulations (CFD, FEA, etc.). The solutions take a long time to run. We often interpolate from solutions rather than rerun every case. We also interpolate between multiple solutions, which leads to even higher dimensional interpolation (like adding time, so x,y,z,t,v).
Matlab does a great job of reading data V at irregular grid of X,Y,Z coordinates, and interpolating from V using griddata, scatterdInterpolan, and/or TriScatteredInterp. For a variety of reasons, I've switched to R. This remains one key area I've not been able to find as good R equivalent. 'akima' only does x,y,V (not, x,y,z,V, much less even higher dimensions like x,y,z,t,v).
The next best thing I've found has been 'krigging'. But krigging behaves more like model fitting and projection, and often does not behave well between irregular grid points. So it's not nearly as robust as simple direct linear interpolation.
Matlab has had griddata for several decades. It's hard to believe R doesn't have an equivalent out there. Any suggestions? Or is there at least a way to use krigging to yield effectively the same result as a direct linear interpolation?
Jonathan
You might start by looking at the package "tripack" to do Delaunay triangulation, which gives you the first step in duplicating scatteredInterpolant().
R interpp() is equivalent to MATLAB scatteredInterpolant().
I'm creating a game where players can make an alloy. To make it less predictable and more interesting, I thought that the durability and hardness of an alloy should not be calculated by a simple formula, because it will be extremely easy to find extrema, where alloy have best statistics.
So the questions is, is there any formula for a function where extrema can be found only by investigating all points? Input values will be in percents: 0.0%-100.0%. I think it should look like this: half sound wave
A very simple way would be a couple of sin function, just vary the constants and the sign for each new player. Here is one example (sin(1.1*x) + sin(x) + sin(0.9 *x))^2
If you use this between 10pi and 20pi you have an by average increasing function with local minima.
Modulating a simple linear or exponential function with trigonometric functions whose frequency and amplitude are dependent on the input should get you what you want.
You don't need a formula, I think — throw a bunch of random values around your domain, and then interpolate (linear interpolation will do) between them. Then you can even change the "formula" completely each time the game is run, or once in a while, or change it slowly with time, etc, etc.
If you want something that is very hard to predict then I would suggest involving a random number generator with the same seed every time. You can use it as an envelope for whatever function you come up with (trig functions or what not) to make it more jagged.
An interesting formula to use would be that of gamma of the Black-Scholes options pricing model. It goes as follows:
You can easily replace the variables, here's a graph of how the function looks:
alt text http://www.sqbimmer.com/aalex/gamma.png