We Keep Coding

how to implement least square polynomial with no built in methods using python?

currently running into a problem solving this.
The objective of the exercise given is to find a polynom of certian degree (the degree is given) from a dataset of points (that can be noist) and to best fit it using least sqaure method.
I don't understand the steps that lead to solving the linear equations?
what are the steps or should anyone provide such a python program that lead to the matrix that I put as an argument in my decomposition program?
Note:I have a python program for cubic splines ,LU decomposition/Guassian decomposition.
Thanks.
I tried to apply guassin / LU decomposition straight away on the dataset but I understand there are more steps to the solution...
I donwt understand how cubic splines add to the mix either..
Edit:
guassian elimintaion :
import numpy as np
import math
def swapRows(v,i,j):
if len(v.shape) == 1:
v[i],v[j] = v[j],v[i]
else:
v[[i,j],:] = v[[j,i],:]
def swapCols(v,i,j):
v[:,[i,j]] = v[:,[j,i]]
def gaussPivot(a,b,tol=1.0e-12):
n = len(b)
# Set up scale factors
s = np.zeros(n)
for i in range(n):
s[i] = max(np.abs(a[i,:]))
for k in range(0,n-1):
# Row interchange, if needed
p = np.argmax(np.abs(a[k:n,k])/s[k:n]) + k
if abs(a[p,k]) < tol: error.err('Matrix is singular')
if p != k:
swapRows(b,k,p)
swapRows(s,k,p)
swapRows(a,k,p)
# Elimination
for i in range(k+1,n):
if a[i,k] != 0.0:
lam = a[i,k]/a[k,k]
a[i,k+1:n] = a[i,k+1:n] - lam*a[k,k+1:n]
b[i] = b[i] - lam*b[k]
if abs(a[n-1,n-1]) < tol: error.err('Matrix is singular')
# Back substitution
b[n-1] = b[n-1]/a[n-1,n-1]
for k in range(n-2,-1,-1):
b[k] = (b[k] - np.dot(a[k,k+1:n],b[k+1:n]))/a[k,k]
return b
def polyFit(xData,yData,m):
a = np.zeros((m+1,m+1))
b = np.zeros(m+1)
s = np.zeros(2*m+1)
for i in range(len(xData)):
temp = yData[i]
for j in range(m+1):
b[j] = b[j] + temp
temp = temp*xData[i]
temp = 1.0
for j in range(2*m+1):
s[j] = s[j] + temp
temp = temp*xData[i]
for i in range(m+1):
for j in range(m+1):
a[i,j] = s[i+j]
return gaussPivot(a,b)
degree = 10 # can be any degree
polyFit(xData,yData,degree)
I was under the impression the code above gets a dataset of points and a degree. The output should be coeefients of a polynom that fits those points but I have a grader that was provided by my proffesor , and after checking the grading the polynom that returns has a lrage error.
After that I tried the following LU decomposition instead:
import numpy as np
def swapRows(v,i,j):
if len(v.shape) == 1:
v[i],v[j] = v[j],v[i]
else:
v[[i,j],:] = v[[j,i],:]
def swapCols(v,i,j):
v[:,[i,j]] = v[:,[j,i]]
def LUdecomp(a,tol=1.0e-9):
n = len(a)
seq = np.array(range(n))
# Set up scale factors
s = np.zeros((n))
for i in range(n):
s[i] = max(abs(a[i,:]))
for k in range(0,n-1):
# Row interchange, if needed
p = np.argmax(np.abs(a[k:n,k])/s[k:n]) + k
if abs(a[p,k]) < tol: error.err('Matrix is singular')
if p != k:
swapRows(s,k,p)
swapRows(a,k,p)
swapRows(seq,k,p)
# Elimination
for i in range(k+1,n):
if a[i,k] != 0.0:
lam = a[i,k]/a[k,k]
a[i,k+1:n] = a[i,k+1:n] - lam*a[k,k+1:n]
a[i,k] = lam
return a,seq
def LUsolve(a,b,seq):
n = len(a)
# Rearrange constant vector; store it in [x]
x = b.copy()
for i in range(n):
x[i] = b[seq[i]]
# Solution
for k in range(1,n):
x[k] = x[k] - np.dot(a[k,0:k],x[0:k])
x[n-1] = x[n-1]/a[n-1,n-1]
for k in range(n-2,-1,-1):
x[k] = (x[k] - np.dot(a[k,k+1:n],x[k+1:n]))/a[k,k]
return x
the results were a bit better but nowhere near what it should be
Edit 2:
I tried the chebyshev method suggested in the comments and came up with:
import numpy as np
def chebyshev_transform(x, n):
"""
Transforms x-coordinates to Chebyshev coordinates
"""
return np.cos(n * np.arccos(x))
def chebyshev_design_matrix(x, n):
"""
Constructs the Chebyshev design matrix
"""
x_cheb = chebyshev_transform(x, n)
T = np.zeros((len(x), n+1))
T[:,0] = 1
T[:,1] = x_cheb
for i in range(2, n+1):
T[:,i] = 2 * x_cheb * T[:,i-1] - T[:,i-2]
return T
degree =10
f = lambda x: np.cos(X)
xdata = np.linspace(-1,1,num=100)
ydata = np.array([f(i) for i in xdata])
M = chebyshev_design_matrix(xdata,degree)
D_x ,D_y = np.linalg.qr(M)
D_x, seq = LUdecomp(D_x)
A = LUsolve(D_x,D_y,seq)
I can't use linalg.qr in my program , it was just for checking how it works.In addition , I didn't get the 'slow way' of the formula that were in the comment.
The program cant get an x point that is not between -1 and 1 , is there any way around it , any normalizition?
Thanks a lot.

Hints:
You are probably asked for an unsophisticated method. If the degree of the polynomial remains low, you can use the straightforward approach below. For the sake of the explanation, I'll use a cubic model.
Assume that you want to fit your data to this polynomial, by observing that it seems to follow a cubic behavior:
ax³ + bx² + cx + d ~ y
[All x and y should be understood with an index i which is omitted for notational convenience.]
If there are more than four data points, you get an overdetermined system of equations, usually with no solution. The trick is to consider the error on the individual equations, e = ax³ + bx² + cx + d - y, and to minimize the total error. As the error is a signed number, negative errors would make minimization impossible. Instead, we minimize the sum of squared errors. (The sum of absolute errors is another option but it unfortunately leads to a much harder problem.)
Min(a, b, c, d) Σ(ax³ + bx² + cx + d - y)²
As the unknown parameters are unconstrained, it suffices to look for a stationary point, i.e. cancel the gradient of the total error. By differentiation on the unknowns a, b, c and d, we obtain
2Σ(ax³x³ + bx²x³ + cxx³ + dx³ - yx³) = 0
2Σ(ax³x² + bx²x² + cxx² + dx² - yx²) = 0
2Σ(ax³x + bx²x + cxx + dx - yx ) = 0
2Σ(ax³ + bx² + cx + d - y ) = 0
As you can recognize, this is a square linear system of equations.

python solve Cubic equation without using sympy

Is it possible to solve Cubic equation without using sympy?
Example:
import sympy as sp
xp = 30
num = xp + 4.44
sp.var('x, a, b, c, d')
Sol3 = sp.solve(0.0509 * x ** 3 + 0.0192 * x ** 2 + 3.68 * x - num, x)
The result is:
[6.07118098358257, -3.2241955998463 - 10.0524891203436*I, -3.2241955998463 + 10.0524891203436*I]
But I want to find a way to do it with numpy or without 3 part lib at all
I tried with numpy:
import numpy as np
coeff = [0.0509, 0.0192, 3.68, --4.44]
print(np.roots(coeff))
But the result is :
[ 0.40668245+8.54994773j 0.40668245-8.54994773j -1.19057511+0.j]

In your numpy method you are making two slight mistakes with the final coefficient.
In the SymPy example your last coefficient is - num, this is, according to your code: -num = - (xp + 4.44) = -(30 + 4.44) = -34.44
In your NumPy example yout last coefficient is --4.44, which is 4.44 and does not equal -34.33.
If you edit the NumPy code you will get:
import numpy as np
coeff = [0.0509, 0.0192, 3.68, -34.44]
print(np.roots(coeff))
[-3.2241956 +10.05248912j -3.2241956 -10.05248912j
6.07118098 +0.j ]
The answer are thus the same (note that NumPy uses j to indicate a complex number. SymPy used I)

You could implement the cubic formula
this Youtube video from mathologer could help understand it.
Based on that, the cubic function for ax^3 + bx^2 + cx + d = 0 can be written like this:
def cubic(a,b,c,d):
n = -b**3/27/a**3 + b*c/6/a**2 - d/2/a
s = (n**2 + (c/3/a - b**2/9/a**2)**3)**0.5
r0 = (n-s)**(1/3)+(n+s)**(1/3) - b/3/a
r1 = (n+s)**(1/3)+(n+s)**(1/3) - b/3/a
r2 = (n-s)**(1/3)+(n-s)**(1/3) - b/3/a
return (r0,r1,r2)
The simplified version of the formula only needs to get c and d as parameters (aka p and q) and can be implemented like this:
def cubic(p,q):
n = -q/2
s = (q*q/4+p**3/27)**0.5
r0 = (n-s)**(1/3)+(n+s)**(1/3)
r1 = (n+s)**(1/3)+(n+s)**(1/3)
r2 = (n-s)**(1/3)+(n-s)**(1/3)
return (r0,r1,r2)
print(cubic(-15,-126))
(5.999999999999999, 9.999999999999998, 2.0)
I'll let you mix in complex number operations to properly get all 3 roots

How to compute the recurrence formula without using array

I'd like to compute the y_{n+1} = (a * y_n * b) + (b * y_n * a), where a and b are some matrix respectively.
And I coded this recurrence formula using array for yn.
yn = []
for n in range(30):
if n == 0:
yn.append(a.dot(b) + b.dot(a))
else:
yn.append(a.dot(yn[n-1]).dot(b) + b.dot(yn[n-1]).dot(a))
However, it turned out this code doesn't work well for large sized matrix because of the memory problem. So, I want a another way to compute this without using array. Can someone help me to solve this?

Just one variable.
y = a.dot(b) + b.dot(a)
for n in range(1, 30):
y = a.dot(y).dot(b) + b.dot(y).dot(a)

How to create an array that can be accessed according to its indices in Numpy?

I am trying to solve the following problem via a Finite Difference Approximation in Python using NumPy:
$u_t = k \, u_{xx}$, on $0 < x < L$ and $t > 0$;
$u(0,t) = u(L,t) = 0$;
$u(x,0) = f(x)$.
I take $u(x,0) = f(x) = x^2$ for my problem.
Programming is not my forte so I need help with the implementation of my code. Here is my code (I'm sorry it is a bit messy, but not too bad I hope):
## This program is to implement a Finite Difference method approximation
## to solve the Heat Equation, u_t = k * u_xx,
## in 1D w/out sources & on a finite interval 0 < x < L. The PDE
## is subject to B.C: u(0,t) = u(L,t) = 0,
## and the I.C: u(x,0) = f(x).
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
# definition of initial condition function
def f(x):
return x^2
# parameters
L = 1
T = 10
N = 10
M = 100
s = 0.25
# uniform mesh
x_init = 0
x_end = L
dx = float(x_end - x_init) / N
#x = np.zeros(N+1)
x = np.arange(x_init, x_end, dx)
x[0] = x_init
# time discretization
t_init = 0
t_end = T
dt = float(t_end - t_init) / M
#t = np.zeros(M+1)
t = np.arange(t_init, t_end, dt)
t[0] = t_init
# Boundary Conditions
for m in xrange(0, M):
t[m] = m * dt
# Initial Conditions
for j in xrange(0, N):
x[j] = j * dx
# definition of solution to u_t = k * u_xx
u = np.zeros((N+1, M+1)) # NxM array to store values of the solution
# finite difference scheme
for j in xrange(0, N-1):
u[j][0] = x**2 #initial condition
for m in xrange(0, M):
for j in xrange(1, N-1):
if j == 1:
u[j-1][m] = 0 # Boundary condition
else:
u[j][m+1] = u[j][m] + s * ( u[j+1][m] - #FDM scheme
2 * u[j][m] + u[j-1][m] )
else:
if j == N-1:
u[j+1][m] = 0 # Boundary Condition
print u, t, x
#plt.plot(t, u)
#plt.show()
So the first issue I am having is I am trying to create an array/matrix to store values for the solution. I wanted it to be an NxM matrix, but in my code I made the matrix (N+1)x(M+1) because I kept getting an error that the index was going out of bounds. Anyways how can I make such a matrix using numpy.array so as not to needlessly take up memory by creating a (N+1)x(M+1) matrix filled with zeros?
Second, how can I "access" such an array? The real solution u(x,t) is approximated by u(x[j], t[m]) were j is the jth spatial value, and m is the mth time value. The finite difference scheme is given by:
u(x[j],t[m+1]) = u(x[j],t[m]) + s * ( u(x[j+1],t[m]) - 2 * u(x[j],t[m]) + u(x[j-1],t[m]) )
(See here for the formulation)
I want to be able to implement the Initial Condition u(x[j],t[0]) = x**2 for all values of j = 0,...,N-1. I also need to implement Boundary Conditions u(x[0],t[m]) = 0 = u(x[N],t[m]) for all values of t = 0,...,M. Is the nested loop I created the best way to do this? Originally I tried implementing the I.C. and B.C. under two different for loops which I used to calculate values of the matrices x and t (in my code I still have comments placed where I tried to do this)
I think I am just not using the right notation but I cannot find anywhere in the documentation for NumPy how to "call" such an array so at to iterate through each value in the proposed scheme. Can anyone shed some light on what I am doing wrong?
Any help is very greatly appreciated. This is not homework but rather to understand how to program FDM for Heat Equation because later I will use similar methods to solve the Black-Scholes PDE.
EDIT: So when I run my code on line 60 (the last "else" that I use) I get an error that says invalid syntax, and on line 51 (u[j][0] = x**2 #initial condition) I get an error that reads "setting an array element with a sequence." What does that mean?

Optimize A*x = B solution for a tridiagonal coefficient matrix

I have a system of equations in the form of A*x = B where [A] is a tridiagonal coefficient matrix. Using the Numpy solver numpy.linalg.solve I can solve the system of equations for x.
See example below of how I develop the tridiagonal [A] martix. the {B} vector, and solve for x:
# Solve system of equations with a tridiagonal coefficient matrix
# uses numpy.linalg.solve
# use Python 3 print function
from __future__ import print_function
from __future__ import division
# modules
import numpy as np
import time
ti = time.clock()
#---- Build [A] array and {B} column vector
m = 1000 # size of array, make this 8000 to see time benefits
A = np.zeros((m, m)) # pre-allocate [A] array
B = np.zeros((m, 1)) # pre-allocate {B} column vector
A[0, 0] = 1
A[0, 1] = 2
B[0, 0] = 1
for i in range(1, m-1):
A[i, i-1] = 7 # node-1
A[i, i] = 8 # node
A[i, i+1] = 9 # node+1
B[i, 0] = 2
A[m-1, m-2] = 3
A[m-1, m-1] = 4
B[m-1, 0] = 3
print('A \n', A)
print('B \n', B)
#---- Solve using numpy.linalg.solve
x = np.linalg.solve(A, B) # solve A*x = B for x
print('x \n', x)
#---- Elapsed time for each approach
print('NUMPY time', time.clock()-ti, 'seconds')
So my question relates to two sections of the above example:
Since I am dealing with a tridiagonal matrix for [A], also called a banded matrix, is there a more efficient way to solve the system of equations instead of using numpy.linalg.solve?
Also, is there a better way to create the tridiagonal matrix instead of using a for-loop?
The above example runs on Linux in about 0.08 seconds according to the time.clock() function.
The numpy.linalg.solve function works fine, but I'm trying to find an approach that takes advantage of the tridiagonal form of [A] in hopes of speeding up the solution even further and then apply that approach to a more complicated example.

There are two immediate performance improvements (1) do not use a loop, (2) use scipy.linalg.solve_banded().
I would write the code something more like
import scipy.linalg as la
# Create arrays and set values
ab = np.zeros((3,m))
b = 2*ones(m)
ab[0] = 9
ab[1] = 8
ab[2] = 7
# Fix end points
ab[0,1] = 2
ab[1,0] = 1
ab[1,-1] = 4
ab[2,-2] = 3
b[0] = 1
b[-1] = 3
return la.solve_banded ((1,1),ab,b)
There may be more elegant ways to construct the matrix, but this works.
Using %timeit in ipython the original code took 112 ms for m=1000. This code takes 2.94 ms for m=10,000, an order of magnitude larger problem yet still almost two orders of magnitude faster! I did not have the patience to wait on the original code for m=10,000. Most of the time in the original may be in constructing the array, I did not test this. Regardless, for large arrays it is much more efficient to only store the non-zero values of the matrix.

There is a scipy.sparse matrix type called scipy.sparse.dia_matrix which captures the structure of your matrix well (it will store 3 arrays, in "positions" 0 (diagonal), 1 (above) and -1 (below)). Using this type of matrix you can try scipy.sparse.linalg.lsqr for solving. If your problem has an exact solution, it will be found, otherwise it will find the solution in least squares sense.
from scipy import sparse
A_sparse = sparse.dia_matrix(A)
ret_values = sparse.linalg.lsqr(A_sparse, C)
x = ret_values[0]
However, this may not be completely optimal in terms of exploiting the triadiagonal structure, there may be a theoretical way of making this faster. What this conversion does do for you is cut down the matrix multiplication expenses to the essential: Only the 3 bands are used. This, in combination with the iterative solver lsqr should already yield a speedup.
Note: I am not proposing scipy.sparse.linalg.spsolve, because it converts your matrix to csr format. However, replacing lsqr with spsolve is worth a try, especially because spsolve can bind UMFPACK, see relevant doc on spsolve. Also, it may be of interest to take a look at this stackoverflow question and answer relating to UMFPACK

You could use scipy.linalg.solveh_banded.
EDIT: You CANNOT used the above as your matrix is not symmetric and I thought it was. However, as was mentioned above in the comment, the Thomas algorithm is great for this
a = [7] * ( m - 2 ) + [3]
b = [1] + [8] * ( m - 2 ) + [4]
c = [2] + [9] * ( m - 2 )
d = [1] + [2] * ( m - 2 ) + [3]
# This is taken directly from the Wikipedia page also cited above
# this overwrites b and d
def TDMASolve(a, b, c, d):
n = len(d) # n is the numbers of rows, a and c has length n-1
for i in xrange(n-1):
d[i+1] -= 1. * d[i] * a[i] / b[i]
b[i+1] -= 1. * c[i] * a[i] / b[i]
for i in reversed(xrange(n-1)):
d[i] -= d[i+1] * c[i] / b[i+1]
return [d[i] / b[i] for i in xrange(n)]
This code is not optimize nor does it use np, but if I (or any of the other fine folks here) have time, I will edit it so that it does those thing. It currently times at ~10 ms for m=10000.

This probably will help
There is a function creates_tridiagonal which will create tridiagonal matrix. There is another function which converts a matrix into diagonal ordered form as requested by SciPy solve_banded function.
import numpy as np
def lu_decomp3(a):
"""
c,d,e = lu_decomp3(a).
LU decomposition of tridiagonal matrix a = [c\d\e]. On output
{c},{d} and {e} are the diagonals of the decomposed matrix a.
"""
n = np.diagonal(a).size
assert(np.all(a.shape ==(n,n))) # check if square matrix
d = np.copy(np.diagonal(a)) # without copy (assignment destination is read-only) error is raised
e = np.copy(np.diagonal(a, 1))
c = np.copy(np.diagonal(a, -1))
for k in range(1,n):
lam = c[k-1]/d[k-1]
d[k] = d[k] - lam*e[k-1]
c[k-1] = lam
return c,d,e
def lu_solve3(c,d,e,b):
"""
x = lu_solve(c,d,e,b).
Solves [c\d\e]{x} = {b}, where {c}, {d} and {e} are the
vectors returned from lu_decomp3.
"""
n = len(d)
y = np.zeros_like(b)
y[0] = b[0]
for k in range(1,n):
y[k] = b[k] - c[k-1]*y[k-1]
x = np.zeros_like(b)
x[n-1] = y[n-1]/d[n-1] # there is no x[n] out of range
for k in range(n-2,-1,-1):
x[k] = (y[k] - e[k]*x[k+1])/d[k]
return x
from scipy.sparse import diags
def create_tridiagonal(size = 4):
diag = np.random.randn(size)*100
diag_pos1 = np.random.randn(size-1)*10
diag_neg1 = np.random.randn(size-1)*10
a = diags([diag_neg1, diag, diag_pos1], offsets=[-1, 0, 1],shape=(size,size)).todense()
return a
a = create_tridiagonal(4)
b = np.random.randn(4)*10
print('matrix a is\n = {} \n\n and vector b is \n {}'.format(a, b))
c, d, e = lu_decomp3(a)
x = lu_solve3(c, d, e, b)
print("x from our function is {}".format(x))
print("check is answer correct ({})".format(np.allclose(np.dot(a, x), b)))
## Test Scipy
from scipy.linalg import solve_banded
def diagonal_form(a, upper = 1, lower= 1):
"""
a is a numpy square matrix
this function converts a square matrix to diagonal ordered form
returned matrix in ab shape which can be used directly for scipy.linalg.solve_banded
"""
n = a.shape[1]
assert(np.all(a.shape ==(n,n)))
ab = np.zeros((2*n-1, n))
for i in range(n):
ab[i,(n-1)-i:] = np.diagonal(a,(n-1)-i)
for i in range(n-1):
ab[(2*n-2)-i,:i+1] = np.diagonal(a,i-(n-1))
mid_row_inx = int(ab.shape[0]/2)
upper_rows = [mid_row_inx - i for i in range(1, upper+1)]
upper_rows.reverse()
upper_rows.append(mid_row_inx)
lower_rows = [mid_row_inx + i for i in range(1, lower+1)]
keep_rows = upper_rows+lower_rows
ab = ab[keep_rows,:]
return ab
ab = diagonal_form(a, upper=1, lower=1) # for tridiagonal matrix upper and lower = 1
x_sp = solve_banded((1,1), ab, b)
print("is our answer the same as scipy answer ({})".format(np.allclose(x, x_sp)))