how to apply horzcat to output arrayfun

Question

François Fabre 2020-4-30

0
链接

此问题的直接链接

https://ww2.mathworks.cn/matlabcentral/answers/521934-how-to-apply-horzcat-to-output-arrayfun

评论： François Fabre 2020-4-30

Here's a simplified example of my problem:

A = [2 7 11; 
     5 9 11]; % This is my starting array

I'd like to obtain

B = [2 3 4 5 7 8 9 11]; % in other words [2:5 7:9 11:11]

Right now, my solution is

B = arrayfun(@(x,y) colon(x,y), A(1,:), A(2,:), 'UniformOutput', false);

Then I use [B{:}] as a comma-separated-list to index another array.

Since I'm doing this in a for loop where A can have hundred of thousands of columns, I'd like to avoid to create a cell by horizontally concatenating output arguments from arrayfun to improve memory layout efficiency.

Do you know if it's possible or if there's a smarter approach?

Thanks in advance!

2 个评论
显示无隐藏无

Stephen23 2020-4-30

Note that you don't need to define an anonymous function, just define a function handle to colon :

B = arrayfun(@colon, A(1,:), A(2,:), 'Uni',0);
%            ^^^^^^ this is all you need

https://www.mathworks.com/help/matlab/matlab_prog/creating-a-function-handle.html

François Fabre 2020-4-30

Indeed, it's a good trick to know. Thank you!

请先登录，再进行评论。

请先登录，再回答此问题。

Answer 1

Guillaume 2020-4-30

1
链接

此回答的直接链接

https://ww2.mathworks.cn/matlabcentral/answers/521934-how-to-apply-horzcat-to-output-arrayfun#answer_429350

I like the functional programming aspect of arrayfun (it clearly says: apply this function to all the elements of these sequence) but note that if speed is critical then an explicit loop is likely to be faster.

With arrayfun you don't have a choice but going through an intermediate cell array. With your example, you don't have to split it in two lines:

B = cell2mat(arrayfun(@(x,y) colon(x,y), A(1,:), A(2,:), 'UniformOutput', false));  %works because the cell array coming out of arrayfun is a row vector of row vectors

With an explicit loop, in the case of your example you can easily calculate where the sequences land in the final array and avoid the cell array altogether:

seqlengths = A(2, :) - A(1, :) + 1;
seqstarts = cumsum([1, seqlengths(1:end-1)]);
B = zeros(1, seqstarts(end)-1);
for colidx = 1:size(A, 2)
    B(seqstarts(colidx) + (0:seqlengths(colidx)-1)) = A(1, colidx) : A(2, colidx);
end

Whether the increase in code complexity is worth the gain is up to do. Of course the above may not work for your real use case.

1 个评论
显示 -1更早的评论隐藏 -1更早的评论

François Fabre 2020-4-30

I compared the three methods when A has 20000 columns :

- arrayfun + [B{:}] - > 1.6s

- cell2mat(arrayfun()) - > 2.5-2.7s

- your explicite for loop - > 2.4-2.5s

However, your approach is the right one. I found here different ways to vectorize the notion of colon. In my case the fastest (0.8-0.9s with 20000 columns) is a slightly different implementation than yours:

seqlengths  = A(2, :) - A(1, :) + 1;
% find end and beginning indices for each chunk
partialLength = cumsum(seqlengths);
cumStart = [1 partialLength(1:end-1)+1];
% preallocate output
% then loop through start/stop pairs, in order, and fill
numtot = sum(seqlengths);
B = zeros(1,numtot);
for colidx = 1:length(A(1, :))
    B(cumStart(colidx):partialLength(colidx)) = A(1, colidx) : A(2, colidx);
end