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

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[ ...

equation solving - Invert and fit implicitly defined curve

I need to fit an implicitly defined curve. I thought I could get some data out of Solve , and then using FindFit . Therefore, I would like to find the relation the parametric curve defined by $F(x,y)=0$: Solve[-(1/2) + 1/2 (0.41202 BesselK[0, 0.1 Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]] + (0.101483 x BesselK[1, 0.1 Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]])/Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]) == 0, y] But I can't get an output: Solve was unable to solve the system with inexact coefficients or the system obtained by direct rationalization of inexact numbers present in the system. Since many of the methods used by Solve require exact input, providing Solve with an exact version of the system may help. >> Edit: In particular, I would like to fit the data coming from the curve with the expression of another curve, and not with a function $f(x)$. In particular, since this clearly looks like a cardioid , I would like it to fit to something like it. What other strategies could I try?

dynamic - How can I make a clickable ArrayPlot that returns input?

I would like to create a dynamic ArrayPlot so that the rectangles, when clicked, provide the input. Can I use ArrayPlot for this? Or is there something else I should have to use? Answer ArrayPlot is much more than just a simple array like Grid : it represents a ranged 2D dataset, and its visualization can be finetuned by options like DataReversed and DataRange . These features make it quite complicated to reproduce the same layout and order with Grid . Here I offer AnnotatedArrayPlot which comes in handy when your dataset is more than just a flat 2D array. The dynamic interface allows highlighting individual cells and possibly interacting with them. AnnotatedArrayPlot works the same way as ArrayPlot and accepts the same options plus Enabled , HighlightCoordinates , HighlightStyle and HighlightElementFunction . data = {{Missing["HasSomeMoreData"], GrayLevel[ 1], {RGBColor[0, 1, 1], RGBColor[0, 0, 1], GrayLevel[1]}, RGBColor[0, 1, 0]}, {GrayLevel[0], GrayLevel...