Skip to main content

matrix - Bottom-most left-most entries in a sparse array



I have a list bdrs of SparseArrays, which represent the boundary matrices of a chain complex $R^{d_0}\overset{\partial_1}{\longleftarrow}R^{d_1}\longleftarrow\ldots\longleftarrow R^{d_{N-1}}\overset{\partial_N}{\longleftarrow}R^{d_N}$ over $R\!\in\!\{\mathbb{Z}, \mathbb{Q}, \mathbb{Z}_p\}$. I store this data as $d_0,\ldots,d_N$=dims, $N$=dim, $R$=p$\!\in\!\{$"Z",0,p$\}$. Typically, $\partial_k$ has dimensions $10^6\!\times\!10^6$ and density $10^{-5}$. See this or this or this link, to understand how SparseArray stores data.





For $k=1,\ldots,N$, I wish to (a) compute a sequence Mm=$M_1,\ldots,M_N$, in which $M_k$ is the set of all invertible entries in $\partial_k$, that have zeros left of them (in their row) and below them (in their column). Then for every $(i,j)$-entry in $M_k$, I wish to (b) delete it from $\partial_k$, and delete the $i$-column from $\partial_{k-1}$ and $j$-row from $\partial_{k+1}$.





First, if $R\!=\!\mathbb{Z}_p$ I mod out the entries, then delete all zero entries, and sort the rest of the entries:


If[p!="Z" && p!=0, bdrs=Mod[bdrs,p]];
bdrs = Table[SparseArray[Sort@ArrayRules@bdrs[[k]],dims[[k;;k+1]]], {k,dim}];


Attempt 1:


Note that some $d_k$ may be $0$. The construction is done by


Mm = DeleteCases[ Table[
i=bdrs[[k,All,j]]["NonzeroPositions"][[-1,1]]; w=bdrs[[k,i,j]];
If[bdrs[[k,i]]["NonzeroPositions"][[1,1]]==j && If[p=="Z", w^2==1, True],
bdrs[[k,i,j]]=0; {i,j}->w, ""],
{k,dim}, {j, If[dims[[k]]*dims[[k+1]]==0, {},
DeleteDuplicates@Flatten@bdrs[[k]]["ColumnIndices"]]}], "",2];

or



Mm = DeleteCases[ Table[ {i,j}=e; w=bdrs[[k,i,j]]; 
If[bdrs[[k,All,j]]["NonzeroPositions"][[-1]]=={i} && If[p=="Z", w^2==1, True],
bdrs[[k,i,j]]=0; {i,j}->w, ""],
{k,dim}, {e, If[dims[[k]]*dims[[k+1]]==0, {},
First/@ GatherBy[bdrs[[k]]["NonzeroPositions"], First]]}], "",2];

and then deletion of rows/columns:


Do[ If[1    If[k


Both constructions (a) are awfully slow on large matrices, but (b) is really fast.


Attempt 2:


Instead of a SparseArray, I use an Association of rows and of columns.


rows[bdr_] := With[
{l=GatherBy[ ArrayRules[bdr][[1;;-2]] /.({i_,j_}->w_Integer) :> {i,j,w}, First]},
Association@Table[r[[1,1]]->(Rest/@r), {r,l}]];
mm[r_,c_] := Module[{j,w}, Association@ DeleteCases[ Table[ {j,w}=r[i][[1]];
If[c[j][[-1]]=={i,w} && If[p=="Z",w^2==1,True], {i,j}->w,""],{i,Keys@r}],""]];
Mm = Table[r=rows@bdrs[[k]]; c=rows@Transpose@bdrs[[k]]; mm[r,c], {k,dim}];


Here (a) is much faster, but if I replace each bdrs[[k]] with its association of rows and of columns, then achieving (b) becomes very slow (applying DeleteCases[#,MemberQ[#[[1,1]]&/@Mm[[k]],#]&]& to all values in the Association).


Comment:


Later, I will be computing a lot sums of rows, so I need to keep either bdrs or rows & columns of these matrices as Associations.


Examples for testing purposes:


Let us use a command, that builds up a chain complex from the faces of a simplicial complex:


chainComplexSC[bases_] := Module[{dim=Length@bases, dims=Length/@bases, basesk, baseskk, bdrs={}, entries, bdr, x},
basesk = AssociationThread[bases[[1]],Range@dims[[1]]];
Do[ baseskk=AssociationThread[bases[[k]],Range@dims[[k]]];
entries=Flatten[Table[{basesk[Delete[s,{{i}}]],baseskk[s]}->(-1)^(i+1),{s,Keys@baseskk},{i,k}],1];
AppendTo[bdrs, SparseArray[entries, dims[[k-1;;k]]]];

basesk=baseskk; Clear[baseskk];, {k,2,dim}]; bdrs];
sCxSimplices[facets_,k_] := ParallelCombine[ DeleteDuplicates@
Flatten[Table[Subsets[s,{k}],{s,#}],1]&, facets,Union,Method->"CoarsestGrained"];

Let us create the $m\!\times\!n$ chessboard complex:


m = 4; 
n = 4;
facets = FindClique[GraphComplement@LineGraph@CompleteGraph[{m, n}], Infinity, All];
dim = Max[Length /@ facets];
bases = Table[sCxSimplices[facets, k + 1], {k, 0, dim - 1}];

dims = Length /@ bases;
bdrs = chainComplexSC[bases];

A good testing example is $m\!=\!8, n\!=\!9$, which has the f-vector dims=$72, 2016, 28224, 211680, 846720, 1693440, 1451520, 362880$.



Answer



This might solve problem (a). You have to preprocess the input matrix A such that it has 1 at positions where the original matrix bdrs[[k]] had an invertible element and -1 at positions where the original matrix had a noninvertible nonzero element.


Here is a test matrix:


n = 10000;
m = 10000;
nedges = 4000000;

A = SparseArray`SparseArraySort@SparseArray[
Transpose[{
RandomInteger[{1, m}, nedges],
RandomInteger[{1, n}, nedges]
}] -> RandomChoice[{-1, 1}, nedges],
{m, n}];

This computes the set of pairs (i,j} as described by OP; it runs through in about a quarter of a second.


M = A \[Function] Module[{Ainv, At, rowswithinv, firstinvcolumns, firstnonzerocolumns, rowswithleadinginv, leadinginvcols, lastnonzerorows},
Ainv = SparseArray[Clip[A, {0, 1}]];

rowswithinv = Random`Private`PositionsOf[Unitize[Differences[Ainv["RowPointers"]]], 1];
If[Length[rowswithinv] > 0,
firstinvcolumns = Flatten[Ainv["ColumnIndices"][[Ainv["RowPointers"][[rowswithinv]] + 1]]];
firstnonzerocolumns = Flatten[A["ColumnIndices"][[A["RowPointers"][[rowswithinv]] + 1]]];
With[{picker = Random`Private`PositionsOf[UnitStep[firstnonzerocolumns - firstinvcolumns], 1]},
rowswithleadinginv = rowswithinv[[picker]];
leadinginvcols = firstinvcolumns[[picker]];
];
If[Length[leadinginvcols] > 0,
At = Transpose[A[[All, leadinginvcols]]];

lastnonzerorows = Flatten[At["ColumnIndices"][[At["RowPointers"][[2 ;; -1]]]]];
With[{picker = Random`Private`PositionsOf[UnitStep[rowswithleadinginv - lastnonzerorows], 1]},
Transpose[{
rowswithleadinginv[[picker]],
leadinginvcols[[picker]]
}]
]
,
{}
]

,
{}
]
];

Now,


 M[A]; // AbsoluteTiming //First


0.227727




The only ingredients of measureable costs are the lines


Ainv = SparseArray[Clip[A, {0, 1}]]; // AbsoluteTiming // First


0.138703



and


At = Transpose[A[[All, leadinginvcols]]];


which costs about 0.096315 seconds.


However, I have not tested the implementation thoroughly, yet.



You might find this interesting. Your example can be generated much quicker by using Szabolcs' package "IGraphM`" along with the following code:


Needs["IGraphM`"]
facets = IGCliques[GraphComplement@LineGraph@CompleteGraph[{m, n}]];
bases = Sort@*Developer`ToPackedArray /@ GatherBy[facets, Length];
dims = Length /@ bases;

Moreover, the following function might be faster at generating the boundary operators:



chainComplexSC2[bases_] := 
Module[{dim, dims, basesk, baseskk, bdrs = {}, entries, bdr, x, a, cf},
dim = Length@bases;
dims = Length /@ bases;
cf = Compile[{{list, _Integer, 1}},
Table[Delete[list, i], {i, 1, Length[list]}],
CompilationTarget -> "WVM",
RuntimeAttributes -> {Listable},
Parallelization -> True
];

basesk = AssociationThread[bases[[1]], Range@dims[[1]]];
Do[
baseskk = AssociationThread[bases[[k]], Range@dims[[k]]];
a = SparseArray[
Rule[
Transpose[{
Lookup[basesk, Flatten[cf[Keys@baseskk], 1]],
Flatten[Transpose@ConstantArray[Range[dims[[k]]], k]]
}],
Flatten[ConstantArray[(-1)^Range[2, k + 1], dims[[k]]]]

],
dims[[k - 1 ;; k]]
];
AppendTo[bdrs, a];
basesk = baseskk;
Clear[baseskk];,
{k, 2, dim}];
bdrs
];

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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....