How can I find the cumulative sum of a vector without using the cumsum funtion or any loops

Question

Harsh Patel;Patel 2017-9-13

0
链接

此问题的直接链接

https://ww2.mathworks.cn/matlabcentral/answers/356403-how-can-i-find-the-cumulative-sum-of-a-vector-without-using-the-cumsum-funtion-or-any-loops

评论： the cyclist 2017-9-21

If I have [4 -2 6 1 2], how I find the cum sum of this vector without using the cumsum function or loops or any other functions. I method I am allowed to use is just simple vector operations (sum,diff,etc) functions.

3 个评论
显示 1更早的评论隐藏 1更早的评论

Image Analyst 2017-9-13

在 MATLAB Online 中打开

What's wrong with the totally obvious:

theSum = 4 + -2 + 6 + 1 + 2;

That is one way that works without loops or any functions. It meets all your stated requirements. Anything wrong with it?

http://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/answers/8626-how-do-i-get-help-on-homework-questions-on-matlab-answers

Stephen23 2017-9-19

编辑：Stephen23 2017-9-19

"It meets all your stated requirements"

All except for the "cumulative sum" part.

请先登录，再进行评论。

请先登录，再回答此问题。

Answer 1

Tim Berk 2017-9-19

1
链接

此回答的直接链接

https://ww2.mathworks.cn/matlabcentral/answers/356403-how-can-i-find-the-cumulative-sum-of-a-vector-without-using-the-cumsum-funtion-or-any-loops#answer_282224

在 MATLAB Online 中打开

I know this is your homework, but I thought it was a fun problem.

You can do this with matrix manipulations:

A = [4 -2 6 1 2]
B = tril(ones(length(A)))
C = A.*B
cum_sum = sum(C,2)

1 个评论
显示 -1更早的评论隐藏 -1更早的评论

Stephen23 2017-9-20

+1 nice and simple.

请先登录，再进行评论。

Answer 2

Stephen23 2017-9-19

1
链接

此回答的直接链接

https://ww2.mathworks.cn/matlabcentral/answers/356403-how-can-i-find-the-cumulative-sum-of-a-vector-without-using-the-cumsum-funtion-or-any-loops#answer_282229

在 MATLAB Online 中打开

>> A = [4,-2,6,1,2];
>> sum(triu(A(:)*ones(1,numel(A))),1)
ans =
    4    2    8    9   11
>> cumsum(A)
ans =
    4    2    8    9   11

6 个评论
显示 4更早的评论隐藏 4更早的评论

Stephen23 2017-9-19

编辑：Stephen23 2017-9-19

在 MATLAB Online 中打开

"I think that's the exact same as my suggestion."

That is quite a strong claim - lets have a look. You use ones to generate a matrix (I used ones to create a vector), and then tril to get a lower triangular array of ones and zeros:

B =
 0   0   0   0
 1   0   0   0
 1   1   0   0
 1   1   1   0
 1   1   1   1

No such matrix occurs occur anywhere in my code (even as an intermediate variable). You then array-multiply (which I did not use) this using implicit array expansion (which I did not use) to generate this matrix (which I never get):

>> A.*B
ans =
-0   0   0   0
-2   0   0   0
-2   6   0   0
-2   6   1   0
-2   6   1   2

If you actually look at my code the first step is to create a matrix filled with the values of A (something that never occurs in your answer), which I achieve using matrix multiplication (something that you did not use):

>> A(:)*ones(1,numel(A))
ans =
   4   4   4   4   4
  -2  -2  -2  -2  -2
   6   6   6   6   6
   1   1   1   1   1
   2   2   2   2   2

And then the second step is to get the triangular array from that matrix which already has all of the values in it (which you do not do). Basically I do the first two steps in the reverse order to your code.

And of course the matrix orientation is also different: did you notice that my intermediate matrix has a different orientation to yours? And why? You might like to look at the two matrices shown above, and how they are calculated (hint: different commands and different inputs). This is also why we had to sum over different dimensions, and get output vectors with different orientations.

Also note that my code fundamentally works with any size or orientation input array:

>> A = [4;-2;6;1;2];
>> sum(triu(A(:)*ones(1,numel(A))),1)
ans =
    4    2    8    9   11

whereas your code cannot handle this (try it).

So there we have it: a different sequence of commands, different intermediate variables, different orientations, different matrices passed to tril or triu (lets not mention that), different permitted inputs, different output orientation. The only common command I can find is ones. I cannot find one single identical intermediate variable, even taking into account any trivial transposing.

Can you please justify your claim that "that's the exact same as my suggestion" ? It is a very strong claim that someone has copied "exact" code without attribution.

Stephen23 2017-9-20

编辑：Stephen23 2017-9-20

在 MATLAB Online 中打开

"... with no further explanation why it would be better"

I certainly don't make any claim that my code is better. I leave that up to the OP to decide. One never knows what the OP really wants, needs, or has already. Your answer is perfectly fine, and I doubt that there is really any advantage in one over the other.

"...aren't they the same in terms of matrix manipulations?"

Even if operations can be performed in a different order from a mathematical perspective this does not necessarily mean that for numeric computations the same is true: for numeric computation order is significant, so in general your statement is not true because of the propagation of numeric error. Of course multiplying by ones and zeros this is unlikely to make any difference... in this case. Hopefully they give the same output.

"...your solution is also faster"

Perhaps the speed difference is due to matrix multiply being slightly faster than the implicit expansion, or generating a vector of ones vs. a matrix of ones, or numel being faster than length. Not much difference though, and it could easily change between MATLAB versions.

"My version for any dimension would be C = A(:).*B;"

Nope, this is wrong:

>> sum(A(:).*B,1)
ans =
   11    7    9    3    2

You would also need to transpose B to get the right answer:

>> sum(A(:).*B.',1)
ans =
    4    2    8    9   11

Tim Berk 2017-9-20

在 MATLAB Online 中打开

"You would also need to transpose B to get the right answer:"

That's right. Or using triu instead of tril.

Since you seem to be interested in small details: technically your code does not work for "any size or orientation array". It only gives the right answer for row vectors, as the answer is always a row vector. If you input a column vector, the answer is the transpose of the actual cumsum. If you input a 2D array the answer is a row vector that has nothing to do with the cumsum of that array.

The cumulative sum of

A = [1 2; 3 4]

Should be

[1 2; 4 6]

or

[1 3; 3 7]

depending on which dimension we are taking the cumulative sum over. Neither of our methods gives such an answer.

Stephen23 2017-9-20

编辑：Stephen23 2017-9-21

@Tim Berk: Good catch, you are right, I was wrong that my code works with "any size ... input array".

请先登录，再进行评论。

Answer 3

Andrei Bobrov 2017-9-20

0
链接

此回答的直接链接

https://ww2.mathworks.cn/matlabcentral/answers/356403-how-can-i-find-the-cumulative-sum-of-a-vector-without-using-the-cumsum-funtion-or-any-loops#answer_282362

在 MATLAB Online 中打开

sum(hankel([zeros(numel(A)-1,1);A(1)],A))

0 个评论
显示 -2更早的评论隐藏 -2更早的评论

请先登录，再进行评论。

Answer 4

the cyclist 2017-9-20

0
链接

此回答的直接链接

https://ww2.mathworks.cn/matlabcentral/answers/356403-how-can-i-find-the-cumulative-sum-of-a-vector-without-using-the-cumsum-funtion-or-any-loops#answer_282447

在 MATLAB Online 中打开

Perhaps the only solution which will not raise the eyebrows of OP's instructor:

A = [4 -2 6 1 2];
nA = numel(A);
cumA = zeros(1,nA);
for ia = 1:nA
    cumA(ia) = sum(A(1:ia));
end

:-)

2 个评论
显示无隐藏无

Tim Berk 2017-9-20

Depends on whether it is a course on matlab or on vector calculus.

In any case, a for loop might not be a good idea for large nA. If I were to instruct a course on matlab, I would prefer students to work with the fastest solution.

the cyclist 2017-9-21

在 MATLAB Online 中打开

The for loop is fast for moderately large nA. In fact, it is the fastest of the three solutions that I tried (in admittedly little testing on my part). For very large nA, there might also be memory issues for some solutions.

rng default
N = 5000;
NR = 100;
A = rand(1,N);
tic
for ii = 1:NR
nA = numel(A);
cumA1 = zeros(1,nA);
for ia = 1:nA
    cumA1(ia) = sum(A(1:ia));
end
end
toc
tic
for ii = 1:NR
B = tril(ones(length(A)));
C = A.*B;
cumA2 = sum(C,2);
end
toc
tic
for ii = 1:NR
cumA3 = sum(triu(A(:)*ones(1,numel(A))),1);
end
toc

请先登录，再进行评论。

How can I find the cumulative sum of a vector without using the cumsum funtion or any loops

3 个评论
显示 1更早的评论隐藏 1更早的评论

回答（4 个）

1 个评论
显示 -1更早的评论隐藏 -1更早的评论

6 个评论
显示 4更早的评论隐藏 4更早的评论

0 个评论
显示 -2更早的评论隐藏 -2更早的评论

2 个评论
显示无隐藏无

另请参阅

类别

标签

Community Treasure Hunt

How can I find the cumulative sum of a vector without using the cumsum funtion or any loops

3 个评论 显示 1更早的评论隐藏 1更早的评论

回答（4 个）

1 个评论 显示 -1更早的评论隐藏 -1更早的评论

6 个评论 显示 4更早的评论隐藏 4更早的评论

0 个评论 显示 -2更早的评论隐藏 -2更早的评论

2 个评论 显示 无隐藏 无

另请参阅

类别

标签

Community Treasure Hunt

3 个评论
显示 1更早的评论隐藏 1更早的评论

1 个评论
显示 -1更早的评论隐藏 -1更早的评论

6 个评论
显示 4更早的评论隐藏 4更早的评论

0 个评论
显示 -2更早的评论隐藏 -2更早的评论

2 个评论
显示无隐藏无