Skip to main content

performance tuning - Making table of matrix product and efficiency


I want to make a table in which each element is a matrix product:


<< Developer`

n = 2;
m = 6;

matrix = Map[ToPackedArray[#] &, Table[Sin[1.0*i*j], {i, 1, m}, {j, 1, n}, {k, 1, n}]];

vector = {IdentityMatrix[n][[1]]}\[Transpose];

Do[Flatten[Table[ #1\[ConjugateTranspose].(matrix[[#2]].#1) &[vector, i], {i, 1, m}]], {ite, 1, 2*10^5}] // AbsoluteTiming
(*{7.430010, Null}*)


In the code above there are two important parts:


First part = Choosing one matrix from the lists of matrices matrix and multiply it by vector.


Second part = Multiplying vector\[ConjugateTranspose] by the result of the first part.


I thought if I convert matrix[[#2]].#1, the first part, into one matrix multiplication, it would be more efficient as instead of many multiplications I calculate all of them in one go:


matrix2 = ToPackedArray[Flatten[Table[matrix[[i]]\[Transpose], {i, 1, m}], 1]];

matrix2 is the desired matrix to do the next step. If you use matrix//MatrixForm, then both the matrices look like each other.


Do[x = matrix2.vector; Flatten[Table[ #1\[ConjugateTranspose].(x[[#2 ;; #2 + n - 1,All]]) &[vector, i], {i, 1, n*m, n}]], {ite, 1, 2*10^5}] // AbsoluteTiming
(*{9.080013, Null}*)


I had to still choose different parts of (matrix2.#1),first part, to multiply that part with #1\[ConjugateTranspose],second part.


As you see although I calculate all the matrix multiplications in the first part at once, it is slower. I thought it might be because of this part of code [[#2 ;; #2 + n - 1, All]] in which I had to choose different parts of the result. I tried:


Do[x = matrix2.vector; Flatten[Table[ (x[[#1 ;; #1 + n - 1, All]]) &[i], {i, 1, n*m, n}]], {ite, 1, 2*10^5}] // AbsoluteTiming
(*{5.290007, Null}*)

Do[Flatten[Table[ (matrix[[#2]].#1) &[vector, i], {i, 1, m}]], {ite, 1, 2*10^5}] // AbsoluteTiming
(*{4.630007, Null}*)

At each iteration for matrix2 I just do the calculation once but for that of matrix at each iteration there are 6 multiplications. In the below I remove the table for matrix2 and replace it with Do for matrix:


Do[x = matrix2.vector, {ite, 1, 2*10^5}] // AbsoluteTiming

(*{0.240000, Null}*)

Do[ Do[(matrix[[#2]].#1) &[vector, i], {i, 1, m}], {ite, 1, 2*10^5}] // AbsoluteTiming
(*{2.620004, Null}*)

Now the calculations for matrix2 are faster. Thus, I believe that choosing parts of matrix2.vector causes the calculation gets slower.


How can I overcome this bottleneck? How can I choose parts of a matrix faster?



Answer



You can increase the performance by transposing your matrix and using Dot without explicit [[...]]


<< Developer`

n = 2;
m = 6;

matrix = Table[Sin[1.0*i*j], {i, m}, {j, n}, {k, n}];
matrix3 = ToPackedArray@Transpose@matrix;

vector = N@Transpose@{IdentityMatrix[n]};
vectorHC = ConjugateTranspose@vector;

Flatten[vectorHC.matrix3.vector, {{1, 3, 2, 4, 5}}] == 

 Flatten@Table[#1\[ConjugateTranspose].(matrix[[#2]].#1) &[vector, i], {i, 1, m}]
(* True *)

Do[Flatten[vectorHC.matrix3.vector, {{1, 3, 2, 4, 5}}], {ite, 10^5}] // AbsoluteTiming
(* {0.894130, Null} *)

Do[Flatten[Table[#1\[ConjugateTranspose].(matrix[[#2]].#1) &[vector, i], {i, m}]], 
  {ite, 10^5}] // AbsoluteTiming
(* {8.979821, Null} *)


Converting vector to a floating-point array (N[...]) also increase the performance a bit.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

mathematical optimization - Minimizing using indices, error: Part::pkspec1: The expression cannot be used as a part specification

I want to use Minimize where the variables to minimize are indices pointing into an array. Here a MWE that hopefully shows what my problem is. vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@ { Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; Minimize[{Total@((vec1[[#]] - vec2[[u[#]]])^2 & /@ Range[1, 3]), cons}, vars, Integers] The error I get: Part::pkspec1: The expression u[1] cannot be used as a part specification. >> Answer Ok, it seems that one can get around Mathematica trying to evaluate vec2[[u[1]]] too early by using the function Indexed[vec2,u[1]] . The working MWE would then look like the following: vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@{ Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; NMinimize[ {Total@((vec1[[#]] - Indexed[vec2, u[#]])^2 & /@ R...
Post a Comment
Read more

functions - Get leading series expansion term?

Given a function f[x] , I would like to have a function leadingSeries that returns just the leading term in the series around x=0 . For example: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x)] x and leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x^3)/4)/(4 + x)] -(1/(16 x^3)) Is there such a function in Mathematica? Or maybe one can implement it efficiently? EDIT I finally went with the following implementation, based on Carl Woll 's answer: lds[ex_,x_]:=( (ex/.x->(x+O[x]^2))/.SeriesData[U_,Z_,L_List,Mi_,Ma_,De_]:>SeriesData[U,Z,{L[[1]]},Mi,Mi+1,De]//Quiet//Normal) The advantage is, that this one also properly works with functions whose leading term is a constant: lds[Exp[x],x] 1 Answer Update 1 Updated to eliminate SeriesData and to not return additional terms Perhaps you could use: leadingSeries[expr_, x_] := Normal[expr /. x->(x+O[x]^2) /. a_List :> Take[a, 1]] Then for your examples: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x), x] leadingSeries[Exp[x], x] leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x...
Post a Comment
Read more

What is and isn't a valid variable specification for Manipulate?

I have an expression whose terms have arguments (representing subscripts), like this: myExpr = A[0] + V[1,T] I would like to put it inside a Manipulate to see its value as I move around the parameters. (The goal is eventually to plot it wrt one of the variables inside.) However, Mathematica complains when I set V[1,T] as a manipulated variable: Manipulate[Evaluate[myExpr], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, T], 0, 1}] (*Manipulate::vsform: Manipulate argument {V[1,T],0,1} does not have the correct form for a variable specification. >> *) As a workaround, if I get rid of the symbol T inside the argument, it works fine: Manipulate[ Evaluate[myExpr /. T -> 15], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, 15], 0, 1}] Why this behavior? Can anyone point me to the documentation that says what counts as a valid variable? And is there a way to get Manpiulate to accept an expression with a symbolic argument as a variable? Investigations I've done so far: I tried using variableQ from this answer , but it says V[1...
Post a Comment
Read more