sparse matrix index shifting (a bug?)
显示 更早的评论
If we run the following code:
la = sparse(ceil(5*rand(1,100)), 1:100, true, 5, 100);
lb = sparse(ones(1,20), 1:20, true, 1, 100);
lb = lb(randperm(100)); % if remove this line, everything is fine
ra = double(bsxfun(@and, la, lb));
disp(sum(sum(ra)));
rb = double(bsxfun(@and, la, full(lb)));
disp(sum(sum(rb)));
the output would be:
(1,1) 98
(1,1) 20
The outputs should be the same since the function full does not change the content of lb, but matlab gives different results in both version 2010a and 2011b (I have only tested in these two versions). It seems that the inconsistency comes from the index shifting operation in line 3. If line 3 is removed, everything becomes fine. Is there any explanation about this? or did I miss something?
Thank you very much.
采纳的回答
Jan
2011-9-29
I assume it is a problem of BSXFUN with sparse logical arrays:
la = sparse(ceil(2 * rand(1, 10)), 1:10, true, 2, 10);
lb = sparse(ones(1, 5), 1:2:10, true, 1, 10);
r = double(la & lb(ones(1, 2), :));
disp(full(r)); % *Ok*
fprintf('\n');
r = double(bsxfun(@and, la, full(lb)));
disp(full(r)); % *Ok*
fprintf('\n');
r = double(bsxfun(@and, la, double(lb)));
disp(full(r)); % *Ok*
fprintf('\n');
r = double(bsxfun(@and, la, lb));
disp(full(r)); % *Fault*
I did not found this in the list of known bugs, but searching is not easy. Please contact the technical support.
更多回答（0 个）
类别
在 帮助中心 和 File Exchange 中查找有关 Sparse Matrices 的更多信息
Community Treasure Hunt
Find the treasures in MATLAB Central and discover how the community can help you!
Start Hunting!
Translated by 
