Skip to main content

core language - Row vectors and column vectors (Mathematica vs Matlab)


As far as I know, Mathematica does not distinguish between row vectors and column vectors: all vectors are seen as lists. I know ways to bypass this as suggested here Product between a column vector and a row vector - error and get Matlab-style matrix multiplication.


My question is why Mathematica and Matlab behaves differently in this context? I have seen a clear explanation in https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica several years ago but I cannot recall it anymore.


I guess it has to do with something fundamental.



Answer



This is a limitation of MATLAB, as MATLAB is only able to work with matrices. It does not have true vectors. It cannot even represent a character array as a 1D array or a structure array as a single element—it always must be 2D.


Mathematica takes a much more general view. It works with arbitrary, $n$-index tensors. A 1-index tensor is called a vector. A 2-index one is called a matrix.


What is commonly called a "row vector" or a "column vector" is not really a vector. It is a $1\times k$ or a $k \times 1 $ matrix.



The dot product of a vector $v$ and a matrix $a$ is $$u_j = \sum_i v_i a_{ij}$$


The product of $a$ and $v$ is $$u_i = \sum_j a_{ij} v_j$$


In general, one can contract any two indices together, although Dot specifically only contracts the last one of the first tensor with the first one of the last tensor. TensorContract can do more general operations.




One particular limitation of Mathematica compared to MATLAB is that Mathematica cannot represent arrays where one of the dimensions is 0, e.g. a 0-by-n matrix. This is not due to the difference in philosophy that I described above. It's because Mathematca uses nested lists, so we can have a 1-by-0 {} but not a 0-by-1 thing.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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 - 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 - 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.