Skip to main content

map - Mapping a function over the parts of a deeply nested Array


I have two tensors:


    tensorS = Array[Subscript[s, #1, #2, #3, #4] &, {2, 16, 16, 19}];
tensorR = Array[Subscript[r, #1, #2, #3] &, {2, 16, 19}];

Here is a Part of the solution that I want to obtain:


    Map[Plus[tensorR[[1, 1]], #] &, tensorS[[1, 1]], {1}];


which is the same as:


    Thread[Plus[Transpose[tensorS[[1, 1]]], tensorR[[1, 1]]], List];

or:


    Inner[Plus, tensorS[[1, 1]], tensorR[[1, 1]], List];

The resulting tensor should have Dimensions {2,16,16,19}.


It can be seen from the part of a solution, that I want to add every element of a tensorR (defined by it's indices i1,i2,i3) to the corresponding elements of a tensorS i1,i2,i3,i4, for all indices i3 of a tensorS. First i1, second i2, and third index i3 of tensorR correspond to first i1, second i2 and fourth i4 index of tensorS, respectively.


This is the solution I want to get, but without using Table:



    Table[Map[Plus[tensorR[[i, j]], #] &, tensorS[[i, j]], {1}], {i, 1, 2}, {j, 1, 16}];

$Q$: How to use the combination od Thread, Map, MapThread, Transpose and Inner functions to obtain the above result? I want to avoid using Part and Table.


I'm sure that there's elegant solution that can be written in one line, but I'm not that good with deeply nested lists, so I decided to ask for your help. I've searched the forum and couldn't find the solution. I apologize if my question is a duplicate.



Answer



Here is a way to use MapThread:


MapThread[Function[{r, s}, r + # & /@ s], {tensorR, tensorS}, 2]

For numeric tensors, it can be compiled to squeeze out a little more performance:


Compile[{{tensorR, _Real, 3}, {tensorS, _Real, 4}}

, MapThread[Function[{r, s}, r + # & /@ s], {tensorR, tensorS}, 2]
]



Performance Measurements


@kguler's solution has notational appeal. Not only that, but on my machine (V10.0.0, Win7, 64-bit, 4 cpus) @kguler's method runs faster than the Table solution for symbolic tensors. And, with a slight modification, it runs faster than both Table and MapThread for numeric tensors.


Here are the combinations I tried, using larger symbolic tensors and much larger numeric tensors:


Symbolic Tensors


$HistoryLength = 0;


symbolsS = Array[Subscript[s, #1, #2, #3, #4] &, {20, 16, 16, 190}];
symbolsR = Array[Subscript[r, #1, #2, #3] &, {20, 16, 190}];

(* bst *)
Table[symbolsR[[i, j]] + # & /@ symbolsS[[i, j]], {i, 1, 20}, {j, 1, 16}] ; // Timing
(* {6.021639, Null} *)

(* kguler *)
Transpose[Transpose[symbolsS, {1, 2, 4, 3}] + symbolsR, {1, 2, 4, 3}]; // Timing
(* {1.591210, Null} *)


(* kguler, modified *)
With[{t = Transpose[#, {1, 2, 4, 3}]&}, t[t @ symbolsS + symbolsR]]; // Timing
(* {1.045207, Null} *)

(* wreach *)
MapThread[Function[{r, s}, r + #& /@ s], {symbolsR, symbolsS}, 2]; // Timing
(* {0.967206, Null} *)

(* mr.wizard / simon woods *)

smartThread[symbolsS + symbolsR, 1]; // Timing
(* {1.528810, Null} *)

Numeric Tensors


SeedRandom[1234];
realsS = RandomReal[1, {20, 160, 160, 190}];
realsR = RandomReal[1, {20, 160, 190}];

(* bst *)
Table[realsR[[i, j]] + # & /@ realsS[[i, j]], {i, 1, 20}, {j, 1, 160}] ; // Timing

(* {4.290027, Null} *)

(* kguler *)
Transpose[Transpose[realsS, {1,2,4,3}] + realsR,{1,2,4,3}]; // Timing
(* {2.839218, Null} *)

(* kguler, modified *)
With[{t = Transpose[#, {1, 2, 4, 3}]&}, t[t @ realsS + realsR]]; // Timing
(* {1.731611, Null} *)


(* wreach *)
MapThread[Function[{r, s}, r + #& /@ s], {realsR, realsS}, 2]; // Timing
(* {2.433616, Null} *)

(* wreach, compiled *)
Compile[{{tensorR, _Real, 3}, {tensorS, _Real, 4}}
, MapThread[Function[{r, s}, r + # & /@ s], {tensorR, tensorS}, 2]
][realsR, realsS]; // Timing
(* {1.903212, Null} *)


(* mr.wizard / simon woods *)
smartThread[realsS + realsR, 1]; // Timing
(* {2.745618, Null} *)

I did not notice significant differences in performance when pinning the kernel to a single CPU. Neither was there a noticeable difference when calling ClearSystemCache[] before each run.


Here is a summary table of performance, with V10, V9, V8 and V7 numbers for comparison:


Test                        V10  V9   V8   V7
symbolic bst 6.02 4.82 5.21 1.01
symbolic kguler 1.59 1.39 1.58 1.23
symbolic mr.W / simon woods 1.53 1.44 2.15 1.64

symbolic kguler, modified 1.05 1.22 1.30 1.03
symbolic wreach 0.97 0.78 0.87 0.95

numeric bst 4.29 4.70 4.21 2.61
numeric kguler 2.83 3.26 2.62 2.62
numeric mr.W / simon woods 2.75 2.59 2.26 2.15
numeric wreach 2.43 2.63 2.53 2.25
numeric wreach, compiled 1.90 1.70 1.40 fail
numeric kguler, modified 1.73 1.79 1.58 1.62


NOTE: The compiled MapThread version failed to execute properly due to a compilation error on V7.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

front end - keyboard shortcut to invoke Insert new matrix

I frequently need to type in some matrices, and the menu command Insert > Table/Matrix > New... allows matrices with lines drawn between columns and rows, which is very helpful. I would like to make a keyboard shortcut for it, but cannot find the relevant frontend token command (4209405) for it. Since the FullForm[] and InputForm[] of matrices with lines drawn between rows and columns is the same as those without lines, it's hard to do this via 3rd party system-wide text expanders (e.g. autohotkey or atext on mac). How does one assign a keyboard shortcut for the menu item Insert > Table/Matrix > New... , preferably using only mathematica? Thanks! Answer In the MenuSetup.tr (for linux located in the $InstallationDirectory/SystemFiles/FrontEnd/TextResources/X/ directory), I changed the line MenuItem["&New...", "CreateGridBoxDialog"] to read MenuItem["&New...", "CreateGridBoxDialog", MenuKey["m", Modifiers-...

How to thread a list

I have data in format data = {{a1, a2}, {b1, b2}, {c1, c2}, {d1, d2}} Tableform: I want to thread it to : tdata = {{{a1, b1}, {a2, b2}}, {{a1, c1}, {a2, c2}}, {{a1, d1}, {a2, d2}}} Tableform: And I would like to do better then pseudofunction[n_] := Transpose[{data2[[1]], data2[[n]]}]; SetAttributes[pseudofunction, Listable]; Range[2, 4] // pseudofunction Here is my benchmark data, where data3 is normal sample of real data. data3 = Drop[ExcelWorkBook[[Column1 ;; Column4]], None, 1]; data2 = {a #, b #, c #, d #} & /@ Range[1, 10^5]; data = RandomReal[{0, 1}, {10^6, 4}]; Here is my benchmark code kptnw[list_] := Transpose[{Table[First@#, {Length@# - 1}], Rest@#}, {3, 1, 2}] &@list kptnw2[list_] := Transpose[{ConstantArray[First@#, Length@# - 1], Rest@#}, {3, 1, 2}] &@list OleksandrR[list_] := Flatten[Outer[List, List@First[list], Rest[list], 1], {{2}, {1, 4}}] paradox2[list_] := Partition[Riffle[list[[1]], #], 2] & /@ Drop[list, 1] RM[list_] := FoldList[Transpose[{First@li...

plotting - How to draw lines between specified dots on ListPlot?

I would like to create a plot where I have unconnected dots and some connected. So far, I have figured out how to draw the dots. My code is the following: ListPlot[{{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4,13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full] I have thought using ListLinePlot command, but I don't know how to specify to the command to draw only selected lines between the dots. Do have any suggestions/hints on how to do that? Thank you. Answer One possibility would be to use Epilog with Line : ListPlot[ {{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4, 13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full, Epilog -> { Line[ ...