performance tuning - Parallel function evaluation for minimal value

I am asking myself, if the evaluation of a function f looking for a minimal value over a discrete set of values can be parallelize (brute scan for a potential minimal value over a rectangular region with specified resolution). Is it possible or just not suitable for parallel computing do to the need to always compare to a reference which needs to happen in the main kernel? As far as I understood it in

Why won't Parallelize speed up my code?

the forced evaluation in the main kernel with SetSharedVariable can cause a significant lost in speed, which I think is the case in my horribly parallelized evaluation (see below). Any suggestions? I am pretty sure, I am just not seeing the obvious perspective. I dont want to use NMinimize, I only want to scan rapidly (if possible also in parallel) a rectangular region with specified resolution and pick up the minimal value. Sorry, if this is a duplicate, I was not able to find an answer. Thanks.

Minimal example:

Function:


f = Sin[x - z + Pi/4] + (y - 2)^2 + 13;

Sequential evaluation with do:

Clear[fmin]
fmin
n = 10^1*2;
fmin = f /. {x -> 0, y -> 0, z -> 0};
fmin // N
start = DateString[]
Do[
 ftemp = f /. {x -> xp, y -> yp, z -> zp};
 If[ftemp < fmin, fmin = ftemp];

 , {xp, 0, Pi, Pi/n}
 , {yp, -2, 4, 6/n}
 , {zp, -Pi, Pi, 2*Pi/n}
 ]
end = DateString[]
DateDifference[start, end, {"Minute", "Second"}]
fmin // N

Horribly parallelized evaluation

Clear[fmin]

fmin
n = 10^1*2;
fmin = f /. {x -> 0, y -> 0, z -> 0};
fmin // N
SetSharedVariable[fmin];
start = DateString[]
ParallelDo[
 ftemp = f /. {x -> xp, y -> yp, z -> zp};
 If[ftemp < fmin, fmin = ftemp];
 , {xp, 0, Pi, Pi/n}

 , {yp, -2, 4, 6/n}
 , {zp, -Pi, Pi, 2*Pi/n}
 ]
end = DateString[]
DateDifference[start, end, {"Minute", "Second"}]
fmin // N

Answer

Don't compare to a single (shared) main-kernel variable (fmin) on each kernel. Instead, allow each kernel to find the smallest of the points it has checked. Let each kernel have its own private fmin. Then you'll have $KernelCount candidates for the minimum. Finally select the smallest of these.

ParallelCombine is made for precisely this type of approach. It may be a good idea to use Method -> "CoarsestGrained".

Comments

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]

plotting - Filling between two spheres in SphericalPlot3D

Manipulate[ SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, Mesh -> None, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], {n, 0, 1}] I cant' seem to be able to make a filling between two spheres. I've already tried the obvious Filling -> {1 -> {2}} but Mathematica doesn't seem to like that option. Is there any easy way around this or ... Answer There is no built-in filling in SphericalPlot3D . One option is to use ParametricPlot3D to draw the surfaces between the two shells: Manipulate[ Show[SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], ParametricPlot3D[{ r {Sin[t] Cos[1.5 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[1.5 Pi], Cos[t]}, r {Sin[t] Cos[0 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[0 Pi], Cos[t]}}, {r, 1, 2 - n}, {t, 0, Pi}, PlotStyle -> Yellow, Mesh -> {2, 15}]], {n, 0, 1}]

plotting - Mathematica: 3D plot based on combined 2D graphs

I have several sigmoidal fits to 3 different datasets, with mean fit predictions plus the 95% confidence limits (not symmetrical around the mean) and the actual data. I would now like to show these different 2D plots projected in 3D as in but then using proper perspective. In the link here they give some solutions to combine the plots using isometric perspective, but I would like to use proper 3 point perspective. Any thoughts? Also any way to show the mean points per time point for each series plus or minus the standard error on the mean would be cool too, either using points+vertical bars, or using spheres plus tubes. Below are some test data and the fit function I am using. Note that I am working on a logit(proportion) scale and that the final vertical scale is Log10(percentage). (* some test data *) data = Table[Null, {i, 4}]; data[[1]] = {{1, -5.8}, {2, -5.4}, {3, -0.8}, {4, -0.2}, {5, 4.6}, {1, -6.4}, {2, -5.6}, {3, -0.7}, {4, 0.04}, {5, 1.0}, {1, -6.8}, {2, -4.7}, {3, -1....

Blog

Search This Blog