Creating 3d Tensor Array from 2d Array (Python) - python

I have two numpy arrays (4x4 each). I would like to concatenate them to a tensor of (4x4x2) in which the first 'sheet' is the first array, second 'sheet' is the second array, etc. However, when I try np.stack the output of d[1] is not showing the correct values of the first matrix.
import numpy as np
x = array([[ 3.38286851e-02, -6.11905173e-05, -9.08147798e-03,
-2.46860166e-02],
[-6.11905173e-05, 1.74237508e-03, -4.52140165e-04,
-1.22904439e-03],
[-9.08147798e-03, -4.52140165e-04, 1.91939979e-01,
-1.82406361e-01],
[-2.46860166e-02, -1.22904439e-03, -1.82406361e-01,
2.08321422e-01]])
print(np.shape(x)) # 4 x 4
y = array([[ 6.76573701e-02, -1.22381035e-04, -1.81629560e-02,
-4.93720331e-02],
[-1.22381035e-04, 3.48475015e-03, -9.04280330e-04,
-2.45808879e-03],
[-1.81629560e-02, -9.04280330e-04, 3.83879959e-01,
-3.64812722e-01],
[-4.93720331e-02, -2.45808879e-03, -3.64812722e-01,
4.16642844e-01]])
print(np.shape(y)) # 4 x 4
d = np.dstack((x,y))
np.shape(d) # indeed it is 4,4,2... but if I do d[1] then it is not the first x matrix.
d[1] # should be y

If you do np.dstack((x, y)), which is the same as the more explicit np.stack((x, y), axis=-1), you are concatenating along the last, not the first axis (i.e., the one with size 2):
(x == d[..., 0]).all()
(y == d[..., 1]).all()
Ellipsis (...) is a python object that means ": as many times as necessary" when used in an index. For a 3D array, you can equivalently access the leaves as
d[:, :, 0]
d[:, :, 1]
If you want to access the leaves along the first axis, your array must be (2, 4, 4):
d = np.stack((x, y), axis=0)
(x == d[0]).all()
(y == d[1]).all()

Use np.stack instead of np.dstack:
>>> d = np.stack([y, x])
>>> np.all(d[0] == y)
True
>>> np.all(d[1] == x)
True
>>> d.shape
(2, 4, 4)

Related

Writing a Transpose a vector in python

I have to write a python function where i need to compute the vector
For A is n by n and xn is n by 1
r_n = Axn - (xn^TAxn)xn
Im using numpy but .T doesn't work on vectors and when I just do
r_n = A#xn - (xn#A#xn)#xn but xn#A#xn gives me a scaler.
I've tried changing the A with the xn but nothing seems to work.
Making a 3x1 numpy array like this...
import numpy as np
a = np.array([1, 2, 3])
...and then attempting to take its transpose like this...
a_transpose = a.T
...will, confusingly, return this:
# [1 2 3]
If you want to define a (column) vector whose transpose you can meaningfully take, and get a row vector in return, you need to define it like this:
a = np.reshape(np.array([1, 2, 3]), (3, 1))
print(a)
# [[1]
# [2]
# [3]]
a_transpose = a.T
print(a_transpose)
# [[1 2 3]]
If you want to define a 1 x n array whose transpose you can take to get an n x 1 array, you can do it like this:
a = np.array([[1, 2, 3]])
and then get its transpose by calling a.T.
If A is (n,n) and xn is (n,1):
A#xn - (xn#A#xn)#xn
(n,n)#(n,1) - ((n,1)#(n,n)#(n,1)) # (n,1)
(n,1) error (1 does not match n)
If xn#A#xn gives scalar that's because xn is (n,) shape; as per np.matmul docs that's a 2d with two 1d arrays
(n,)#(n,n)#(n,) => (n,)#(n,) -> scalar
I think you want
(1,n) # (n,n) # (n,1) => (1,1)
Come to think of it that (1,1) array should be same single values as the scalar.
Sample calculation; 1st with the (n,) shape:
In [6]: A = np.arange(1,10).reshape(3,3); x = np.arange(1,4)
In [7]: A#x
Out[7]: array([14, 32, 50]) # (3,3)#(3,)=>(3,)
In [8]: x#A#x # scalar
Out[8]: 228
In [9]: (x#A#x)#x
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ValueError Traceback (most recent call last)
Cell In[9], line 1
----> 1 (x#A#x)#x
ValueError: matmul: Input operand 0 does not have enough dimensions (has 0, gufunc core with signature (n?,k),(k,m?)->(n?,m?) requires 1)
matmul does not like to work with scalars. But we can use np.dot instead, or simply multiply:
In [10]: (x#A#x)*x
Out[10]: array([228, 456, 684]) # (3,)
In [11]: A#x - (x#A#x)*x
Out[11]: array([-214, -424, -634])
Change the array to (3,1):
In [12]: xn = x[:,None]; xn.shape
Out[12]: (3, 1)
In [13]: A#xn - (xn.T#A#xn)*xn
Out[13]:
array([[-214],
[-424],
[-634]]) # same numbers but in (3,1) shape

Matrix multiplication while subsetting elements from matrices and storing in a new matrix

I am attempting a numpy.matmul call using as variables
Matrix A of dimensions (p, t, q)
Matrix B of dimensions (r, t).
A categories vector of shape r and p categories, used to take slices of B and define the index of A do use.
The multiplications are done iteratively using the indices of each category. For each category p_i, I extract from A a submatrix (t, q). Then, I multiply those with a subset of B (x, t), where x is a mask defined by r == p_i. Finally, the matrix multiplication of (x, t) and (t, q) produces the output (x, q) which is stored at S[x].
I have noted that I cannot figure out a non-iterative version of this algorithm. The first snippet describes an iterative solution. The second one is an attempt at what I would wish to get, where everything is calculated as a single-step and would be presumably faster. However, it is incorrect because matrix A has three dimensions instead of two. Maybe there is no way to do this in NumPy with a single call, and in general, looking for advice/ideas to try out.
Thanks!
import numpy as np
p, q, r, t = 2, 9, 512, 4
# data initialization (random)
np.random.seed(500)
S = np.random.rand(r, q)
A = np.random.randint(0, 3, size=(p, t, q))
B = np.random.rand(r, t)
categories = np.random.randint(0, p, r)
print('iterative') # iterative
for i in range(p):
# print(i)
a = A[i, :, :]
mask = categories == i
b = B[mask]
print(b.shape, a.shape, S[mask].shape,
np.matmul(b, a).shape)
S[mask] = np.matmul(b, a)
print(S.shape)
a simple way to write it down
S = np.random.rand(r, q)
print(A[:p,:,:].shape)
result = np.matmul(B, A[:p,:,:])
# iterative assignment
i = 0
S[categories == i] = result[i, categories == i, :]
i = 1
S[categories == i] = result[i, categories == i, :]
The next snippet will produce an error during the multiplication step.
# attempt to multiply once, indexing all categories only once (not possible)
np.random.seed(500)
S = np.random.rand(r, q)
# attempt to use the categories vector
a = A[categories, :, :]
b = B[categories]
# due to the shapes of the arrays, this multiplication is not possible
print('\nsingle step (error due to shapes of the matrix a')
print(b.shape, a.shape, S[categories].shape)
S[categories] = np.matmul(b, a)
print(scores.shape)
iterative
(250, 4) (4, 9) (250, 9) (250, 9)
(262, 4) (4, 9) (262, 9) (262, 9)
(512, 9)
single step (error due to shapes of the 2nd matrix a).
(512, 4) (512, 4, 9) (512, 9)
In [63]: (np.ones((512,4))#np.ones((512,4,9))).shape
Out[63]: (512, 512, 9)
This because the first array is broadcasted to (1,512,4). I think you want instead to do:
In [64]: (np.ones((512,1,4))#np.ones((512,4,9))).shape
Out[64]: (512, 1, 9)
Then remove the middle dimension to get a (512,9).
Another way:
In [72]: np.einsum('ij,ijk->ik', np.ones((512,4)), np.ones((512,4,9))).shape
Out[72]: (512, 9)
To remove the loop altogether, you can try this
bigmask = np.arange(p)[:, np.newaxis] == categories
C = np.matmul(B, A)
res = C[np.broadcast_to(bigmask[..., np.newaxis], C.shape)].reshape(r, q)
# `res` has the same rows as the iterative `S` but in the wrong order
# so we need to reorder the rows
sort_index = np.argsort(np.broadcast_to(np.arange(r), bigmask.shape)[bigmask])
assert np.allclose(S, res[sort_index])
Though I'm not sure it's much faster than the iterative version.

Generating Position Vectors from Numpy Meshgrid

I'll try to explain my issue here without going into too much detail on the actual application so that we can stay grounded in the code. Basically, I need to do operations to a vector field. My first step is to generate the field as
x,y,z = np.meshgrid(np.linspace(-5,5,10),np.linspace(-5,5,10),np.linspace(-5,5,10))
Keep in mind that this is a generalized case, in the program, the bounds of the vector field are not all the same. In the general run of things, I would expect to say something along the lines of
u,v,w = f(x,y,z).
Unfortunately, this case requires so more difficult operations. I need to use a formula similar to
where the vector r is defined in the program as np.array([xgrid-x,ygrid-y,zgrid-z]) divided by its own norm. Basically, this is a vector pointing from every point in space to the position (x,y,z)
Now Numpy has implemented a cross product function using np.cross(), but I can't seem to create a "meshgrid of vectors" like I need.
I have a lambda function that is essentially
xgrid,ygrid,zgrid=np.meshgrid(np.linspace(-5,5,10),np.linspace(-5,5,10),np.linspace(-5,5,10))
B(x,y,z) = lambda x,y,z: np.cross(v,np.array([xgrid-x,ygrid-y,zgrid-z]))
Now the array v is imported from another class and seems to work just fine, but the second array, np.array([xgrid-x,ygrid-y,zgrid-z]) is not a proper shape because it is a "vector of meshgrids" instead of a "meshgrid of vectors". My big issue is that I cannot seem to find a method by which to format the meshgrid in such a way that the np.cross() function can use the position vector. Is there a way to do this?
Originally I thought that I could do something along the lines of:
x,y,z = np.meshgrid(np.linspace(-2,2,5),np.linspace(-2,2,5),np.linspace(-2,2,5))
A = np.array([x,y,z])
cross_result = np.cross(np.array(v),A)
This, however, returns the following error, which I cannot seem to circumvent:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
File "C:\Python27\lib\site-packages\numpy\core\numeric.py", line 1682, in cross
raise ValueError(msg)
ValueError: incompatible dimensions for cross product
(dimension must be 2 or 3)
There's a work around with reshape and broadcasting:
A = np.array([x_grid, y_grid, z_grid])
# A.shape == (3,5,5,5)
def B(v, p):
'''
v.shape = (3,)
p.shape = (3,)
'''
shape = A.shape
Ap = A.reshape(3,-1) - p[:,None]
return np.cross(v[None,:], Ap.reshape(3,-1).T).reshape(shape)
print(B(v,p).shape)
# (3, 5, 5, 5)
I think your original attempt only lacks the specification of the axis along which the cross product should be executed.
x, y, z = np.meshgrid(np.linspace(-2, 2, 5),np.linspace(-2, 2, 5), np.linspace(-2, 2, 5))
A = np.array([x, y, z])
cross_result = np.cross(np.array(v), A, axis=0)
I tested this with the code below. As an alternative to np.array([x, y, z]), you can also use np.stack(x, y, z, axis=0), which clearly shows along which axis the meshgrids are stacked to form a meshgrid of vectors, the vectors being aligned with axis 0. I also printed the shape each time and used random input for testing. In the test, the output of the formula is compared at a random index to the cross product of the input-vector at the same index with vector v.
import numpy as np
x, y, z = np.meshgrid(np.linspace(-5, 5, 10), np.linspace(-5, 5, 10), np.linspace(-5, 5, 10))
p = np.random.rand(3) # random reference point
A = np.array([x-p[0], y-p[1], z-p[2]]) # vectors from positions to reference
A_bis = np.stack((x-p[0], y-p[1], z-p[2]), axis=0)
print(f"A equals A_bis? {np.allclose(A, A_bis)}") # the two methods of stacking yield the same
v = -1 + 2*np.random.rand(3) # random vector v
B = np.cross(v, A, axis=0) # cross-product for all points along correct axis
print(f"Shape of v: {v.shape}")
print(f"Shape of A: {A.shape}")
print(f"Shape of B: {B.shape}")
print("\nComparison for random locations: ")
point = np.random.randint(0, 9, 3) # generate random multi-index
a = A[:, point[0], point[1], point[2]] # look up input-vector corresponding to index
b = B[:, point[0], point[1], point[2]] # look up output-vector corresponding to index
print(f"A[:, {point[0]}, {point[1]}, {point[2]}] = {a}")
print(f"v = {v}")
print(f"Cross-product as v x a: {np.cross(v, a)}")
print(f"Cross-product from B (= v x A): {b}")
The resulting output looks like:
A equals A_bis? True
Shape of v: (3,)
Shape of A: (3, 10, 10, 10)
Shape of B: (3, 10, 10, 10)
Comparison for random locations:
A[:, 8, 1, 1] = [-4.03607312 3.72661831 -4.87453077]
v = [-0.90817859 0.10110274 -0.17848181]
Cross-product as v x a: [ 0.17230515 -3.70657882 -2.97637688]
Cross-product from B (= v x A): [ 0.17230515 -3.70657882 -2.97637688]

RuntimeError when changing the values of specific parts of a `torch.Tensor`

Say I have a 3 dimentional tensor x initialized with zeros:
x = torch.zeros((2, 2, 2))
and an other 3 dimentional tensor y
y = torch.ones((2, 1, 2))
I am trying to change the values of the first line of x[0] and x[1] like this
x[:, 0, :] = y
but I get this error:
RuntimeError: expand(torch.FloatTensor{[2, 1, 2]}, size=[2, 2]): the number of sizes provided (2) must be greater or equal to the number of dimensions in the tensor (3)
It is as if the tensor y was getting squeezed somehow. Is there a way around this?
Is this what you want?
x = torch.arange(0, 8).reshape((2,2,2))
y = torch.ones((2,2))
x2 = x.permute(1,0,2)
x2[0] = y
x_target = x2.permute(1,0,2)
The value of first rows of x are changed by y .
I found a straight forward way to do it:
x[:, 0, :] = y[:, 0, :]

Creating an X by Y dimension array of (a,b) points in Python 2.7

I've been oddly bashing my head against this problem for several hours, and would appreciate any help!
I would like to create a (for example) 100x100 array in which each index is a (x,y) coordinate. The overall goal here is the following:
I have x,y coordinates and would like to arrange them in a 2D space so that I can use the np.diagonal function to return the (x,y) coordinates along a line. I'll then use those (x,y) points to compare particular values.
The first step here is actually creating the array and I just can't seem to do it.
I'm not sure about the numpy part of your request, but you can create the array like so:
coords = [[(y,x) for x in range(100)] for y in range(100)]
>>> coords[50][2]
(50,2)
If you just want the values along the diagonal, why dont you just create a 1D list?
import numpy as np
xs = np.linspace(1,10,100) # assuming x goes form 1 to 10
ys = np.linspace(2,3, 100) # assuming y goes from 2 to 3
xy = zip(xs, ys)
You no longer need the 2d array and then call the diagonal.
Working on Jaime's suggestion:
>>> x, y = numpy.mgrid[0:100, 0:100]
>>> z = numpy.array([x, y]).transpose([1,2,0])
>>> z[50, 2]
array([50, 2])
EDIT: Given an array of points p, of the shape (2, P), this is how you would find out which of these points are underneath diagonal n:
>>> d = numpy.diagonal(z, n)
>>> cond0 = p[0, None] < d[0, :, None]
>>> cond1 = p[1, None] < d[1, :, None]
>>> good_indices_full = numpy.where(numpy.logical_and(cond0, cond1))
>>> good_indices = good_indices_full[1]
(I prefer to work with "good_indices", i.e. write stuff like p[:, good_indices], rather than the full tuple of arrays that numpy.where gives back).

Categories