搜索
k-Wave is a MATLAB community toolbox with a track record that includes over 2,500 citations on Google Scholar and over 7,500 downloads on File Exchange. It is built for the "time-domain simulation of acoustic wave fields" and was recently highlighted as a Pick of the Week.
In December, release v1.4.1 was published on GitHub including two new features led by the project's core contributors with domain experts in this field. This first release in several years also included quality and maintainability enhancements supported by a new code contributor, GitHub user stellaprins, who is a Research Software Engineer at University College London. Her contributions in 2025 spanned several software engineering aspects, including the addition of continuous integration (CI), fixing several bugs, and updating date/time handling to use datetime. The MATLAB Community Toolbox Program sponsored these contributions, and welcomes to see them now integrated into a release for k-Wave users.
I'd like to share some work from Controls Educator and long term collabortor @Dr James E. Pickering from Harper Adams University. He is currently developing a teaching architecture for control engineering (ACE-CORE) and is looking for feedback from the engineering community.
ACE-CORE is delivered through ACE-Box, a modular hardware platform (Base + Sense, Actuate). More on the hardware here: What is the ACE-Box?
The Structure
(1) Comprehend
Learners build conceptual understanding of control systems by mapping block diagrams directly to physical components and signals. The emphasis is on:
- Feedback architecture
- Sensing and actuation
- Closed-loop behaviour in practical terms
(2) Operate
Using ACE-Box (initially Base + Sense), learners run real closed-loop systems. The learners measure, actuate, and observe real phenomena such as: Noise, Delay, Saturation
Engineering requirements (settling time, overshoot, steady-state error, etc.) are introduced explicitly at this stage.
After completing core activities (e.g., low-pass filter implementation or PID tuning), the pathway branches (see the attached diagram)
(3a) Refine (Option 1) Students improve performance through structured tuning:
- PID gains
- Filter coefficients
- Performance trade-offs
The focus is optimisation against defined engineering requirements.
(3b) Refine → Engineer (Option 2)
Modelling and analytical design become more explicit at this stage, including:
- Mathematical modelling
- Transfer functions
- System identification
- Stability analysis
- Analytical controller design
Why the Branching?
The structure reflects two realities:
- Engineers who operate and refine existing control systems
- Engineers who design control systems through mathematical modelling
Your perspective would be very valuable:
- Does this progression reflect industry reality?
- Is the branching structure meaningful?
- What blind spots do you see?
Constructive critique is very welcome. Thank you!
Featuring: Dr. Arthur Clavière, Collins Aerospace
How can we be confident that a machine learning model will behave safely on data it’s never seen—especially in avionics? In this session, Dr. Arthur Clavière introduces a formal methods approach to verifying maching learning generalization. The talk highlights how formal verification can be apploied toneural networks in safety-critical avionics systems.
💬 Discussion question:
Where do you see formal verification having the biggest impact on deploying ML in safety‑critical systems—and what challenges still stand in the way?
Join the conversation below 👇
I was reading Yann Debray's recent post on automating documentation with agentic AI and ended up spending more time than expected in the comments section. Not because of the comments themselves, but because of something small I noticed while trying to write one. There is no writing assistance of any kind before you post. You type, you submit, and whatever you wrote is live.
For a lot of people that is fine. But MATLAB Central has users from all over the world, and I have seen questions on MATLAB Answers where the technical reasoning is clearly correct but the phrasing makes it hard to follow. The person knew exactly what they meant. The platform just did not help them say it clearly.
I want to share a few ideas around this. They are not fully formed proposals but I think the direction is worth discussing, especially given how much AI tooling MathWorks has built recently.
What the platform has today
When you write a post in Discussions or an answer in MATLAB Answers, the editor gives you basic formatting options. Code blocks, some text styling, that is mostly it. The AI Chat Playground exists as a separate tool, and MATLAB Copilot landed in R2025a for the desktop. But none of that is inside the editor where people actually write community content.
Four things are missing that I think would make a real difference.
Grammar and clarity checking before you post
Not a forced rewrite. Just an optional Check My Draft button that highlights unclear sentences or anything that might trip a reader up. The user reviews it, decides what to change, then posts.
What makes this different from plugging in Grammarly is that a general-purpose tool does not know that readtable is a MATLAB function. It does not know that NaN, inf, or linspace are not errors. A MATLAB-aware checker could flag things that generic tools miss, like someone writing readTable instead of readtable in a solution post.
The llms-with-matlab package already exists on GitHub. Something like this could be built on top of it with a prompt that includes MATLAB function vocabulary as context. That is not a large lift given what is already there.
Translation support
MATLAB Central already has a Japanese-language Discussions channel. That tells you something about the community. The platform is global but most of the technical content is in English, and there is a real gap there.
Two options that would help without being intrusive:
- Write in your language, click Translate, review the English version, then post. The user is still responsible for what goes live.
- A per-post Translate button so readers can view content in a language they are more comfortable with, without changing what is stored on the platform.
A student who has the right answer to a MATLAB Answers question might not post it because they are not confident writing in English. Translation support changes that. The community gets the answer and the contributor gets the credit.
In-editor code suggestions
When someone writes a solution post they usually write the code somewhere else, test it, copy it, paste it, and format it manually. An in-editor assistant that generates a starting scaffold from a plain-text description would cut that loop down.
The key word is scaffold, not a finished answer. The label should say something like AI-generated draft, verify before posting so it is clear the person writing is still accountable. MATLAB Copilot already does something close to this inside the desktop editor. Bringing a lighter version of it into the community editor feels like a natural extension of what already exists.
A note on feasibility
These ideas are not asking for something from scratch. MathWorks already has llms-with-matlab, the MCP Core Server, and MATLAB Copilot as infrastructure. Grammar checking and translation are well-solved problems at the API level. The MATLAB-specific vocabulary awareness is the part worth investing in. None of it should be on by default. All of it should be opt-in and clearly labeled when it runs.
One more thing: diagrams in posts
Right now the only way to include a diagram in a post is to make it externally and upload an image. A lightweight drag-and-drop diagram tool inside the editor would let people show a process or structure quickly without leaving the platform. Nothing complex, just boxes and arrows. For technical explanations it is often faster to draw than to write three paragraphs.
What I am curious about
I am a Data Science student at CU Boulder and an active MATLAB user. These ideas came up while using the platform, not from a product roadmap. I do not know what is already being discussed internally at MathWorks, so it is entirely possible some of this is in progress.
Has anyone else run into the same friction points when writing on MATLAB Central? And for anyone at MathWorks who works on the community platform, is the editor something that gets investment alongside the product tools?
Happy to hear where I am wrong on the feasibility side too.
AI assisted with grammar and framing. All ideas and editorial decisions are my own.
🚀 Unlock Smarter Control Design with AI
What if AI could help you design better controllers—faster and with confidence?
In this session, Naren Srivaths Raman and Arkadiy Turevskiy (MathWorks) show how control engineers are using MATLAB and Simulink to integrate AI into real-world control design and implementation.
You’ll see how AI is being applied to:
🧠 Advanced plant modeling using nonlinear system identification and reduced order modeling
📡 Virtual sensors and anomaly detection to estimate hard-to-measure signals
🎯 Datadriven control design, including nonlinear MPC with neural statespace models and reinforcement learning
⚡ Productivity gains with generative AI, powered by MATLAB Copilot
I coded this app to solve the 20 or so test cases included with the Cody problem 'visually' and step-by-step. For extra fun, it can also be used to play the game... Any comments or suggestions welcome!
At #9 in our MATLAB EXPO 2025 countdown: From Tinkerer to Developer—A Journey in Modern Engineering Software Development
A big thank‑you to Greg Diehl at NAVAIR and Michelle Allard at MathWorks, the team behind this session, for sharing their multi‑year evolution from rapid‑fire experimenting to disciplined, scalable software development.
If you’ve ever wondered what it really takes to move MATLAB code from “it works!” to “it’s ready for production,” this talk captures that transition. The team highlights how improved testing practices, better structure, and close collaboration with MathWorks experts helped them mature their workflows and tackle challenges around maintainability and code quality.
Curious about the pivotal moments that helped them level up their engineering software practices?
Over the past few days I noticed a minor change on the MATLAB File Exchange:
For a FEX repository, if you click the 'Files' tab you now get a file-tree–style online manager layout with an 'Open in new tab' hyperlink near the top-left. This is very useful:
If you want to share that specific page externally (e.g., on GitHub), you can simply copy that hyperlink. For .mlx files it provides a perfect preview. I'd love to hear your thoughts.
EXAMPLE:
🤗🤗🤗
I wanted to share something I've been thinking about to get your reactions. We all know that most MATLAB users are engineers and scientists, using MATLAB to do engineering and science. Of course, some users are professional software developers who build professional software with MATLAB - either MATLAB-based tools for engineers and scientists, or production software with MATLAB Coder, MATLAB Compiler, or MATLAB Web App Server.
I've spent years puzzling about the very large grey area in between - engineers and scientists who build useful-enough stuff in MATLAB that they want their code to work tomorrow, on somebody else's machine, or maybe for a large number of users. My colleagues and I have taken to calling them "Reluctant Developers". I say "them", but I am 1,000% a reluctant developer.
I first hit this problem while working on my Mech Eng Ph.D. in the late 90s. I built some elaborate MATLAB-based tools to run experiments and analysis in our lab. Several of us relied on them day in and day out. I don't think I was out in the real world for more than a month before my advisor pinged me because my software stopped working. And so began a career of building amazing, useful, and wildly unreliable tools for other MATLAB users.
About a decade ago I noticed that people kept trying to nudge me along - "you should really write tests", "why aren't you using source control". I ignored them. These are things software developers do, and I'm an engineer.
I think it finally clicked for me when I listened to a talk at a MATLAB Expo around 2017. An aerospace engineer gave a talk on how his team had adopted git-based workflows for developing flight control algorithms. An attendee asked "how do you have time to do engineering with all this extra time spent using software development tools like git"? The response was something to the effect of "oh, we actually have more time to do engineering. We've eliminated all of the waste from our unamanaged processes, like multiple people making similar updates or losing track of the best version of an algorithm." I still didn't adopt better practices, but at least I started to get a sense of why I might.
Fast-forward to today. I know lots of users who've picked up software dev tools like they are no big deal, but I know lots more who are still holding onto their ad-hoc workflows as long as they can. I'm on a bit of a campaign to try to change this. I'd like to help MATLAB users recognize when they have problems that are best solved by borrowing tools from our software developer friends, and then give a gentle onramp to using these tools with MATLAB.
I recently published this guide as a start:
Waddya think? Does the idea of Reluctant Developer resonate with you? If you take some time to read the guide, I'd love comments here or give suggestions by creating Issues on the guide on GitHub (there I go, sneaking in some software dev stuff ...)
Couldn’t catch everything at MATLAB EXPO 2025? You’re not alone. Across keynotes and track talks, there were too many gems for one sitting. For the next 9 weeks, we’ll reveal the "Top 10" sessions attended (workshops excluded)—one per week—so you can binge the best and compare notes with peers.
Starting at #10: Simulation-Driven Development of Autonomous UAVs Using MATLAB
A huge thanks to Dr. Shital S. Chiddarwar from Visvesvaraya National Institute of Technology Nagpur who delivered this presentation online at MATLAB EXPO 2025. Are you curious how this workflow accelerates development and boosts reliability?
I recently created a short 5-minute video covering 10 tips for students learning MATLAB. I hope this helps!
DocMaker allows you to create MATLAB toolbox documentation from Markdown documents and MATLAB scripts.
The MathWorks Consulting group have been using it for a while now, and so David Sampson, the director of Application Engineering, felt that it was time to share it with the MATLAB and Simulink community.
David listed its features as:
➡️ write documentation in Markdown not HTML
🏃 run MATLAB code and insert textual and graphical output
📜 no more hand writing XML index files
🕸️ generate documentation for any release from R2021a onwards
💻 view and edit documentation in MATLAB, VS Code, GitHub, GitLab, ...
🎉 automate toolbox documentation generation using MATLAB build tool
📃 fully documented using itself
😎 supports light, dark, and responsive modes
🐣 cute logo
I got an email message that says all the files I've uploaded to the File Exchange will be given unique names. Are these new names being applied to my files automatically? If so, do I need to download them to get versions with the new name so that if I update them they'll have the new name instead of the name I'm using now?
A coworker shared with me a hilarious Instagram post today. A brave bro posted a short video showing his MATLAB code… casually throwing 49,000 errors!
Surprisingly, the video went virial and recieved 250,000+ likes and 800+ comments. You really never know what the Instagram algorithm is thinking, but apparently “my code is absolutely cooked” is a universal developer experience 😂
Last note: Can someone please help this Bro fix his code?
Currently, the open-source MATLAB Community is accessed via the desktop web interface, and the experience on mobile devices is not very good—especially switching between sections like Discussion, FEX, Answers, and Cody is awkward. Having a dedicated app would make using the community much more convenient on phones.
Similarty,github has Mobile APP, It's convient for me.
https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/answers/2182045-why-can-t-i-renew-or-purchase-add-ons-for-m…
"As of January 1, 2026, Perpetual Student and Home offerings have been sunset and replaced with new Annual Subscription Student and Home offerings."
So, Perpetual licenses for Student and Home versions are no more. Also, the ability for Student and Home to license just MATLAB by itself has been removed.
The new offering for Students is $US119 per year with no possibility of renewing through a Software Maintenance Service type offering. That $US119 covers the Student Suite of MATLAB and Simulink and 11 other toolboxes. Before, the perpetual license was $US99... and was a perpetual license, so if (for example) you bought it in second year you could use it in third and fourth year for no additional cost. $US99 once, or $US99 + $US35*2 = $US169 (if you took SMS for 2 years) has now been replaced by $US119 * 3 = $US357 (assuming 3 years use.)
The new offering for Home is $US165 per year for the Suite (MATLAB + 12 common toolboxes.) This is a less expensive than the previous $US150 + $US49 per toolbox if you had a use for those toolboxes . Except the previous price was a perpetual license. It seems to me to be more likely that Home users would have a use for the license for extended periods, compared to the Student license (Student licenses were perpetual licenses but were only valid while you were enrolled in degree granting instituations.)
Unfortunately, I do not presently recall the (former) price for SMS for the Home license. It might be the case that by the time you added up SMS for base MATLAB and the 12 toolboxes, that you were pretty much approaching $US165 per year anyhow... if you needed those toolboxes and were willing to pay for SMS.
But any way you look at it, the price for the Student version has effectively gone way up. I think this is a bad move, that will discourage students from purchasing MATLAB in any given year, unless they need it for courses. No (well, not much) more students buying MATLAB with the intent to explore it, knowing that it would still be available to them when it came time for their courses.
You may have come across code that looks like that in some languages:
stubFor(get(urlPathEqualTo("/quotes"))
.withHeader("Accept", equalTo("application/json"))
.withQueryParam("s", equalTo(monitoredStock))
.willReturn(aResponse())
.withStatus(200)
.withHeader("Content-Type", "application/json")
.withBody("{\\"symbol\\": \\"XYZ\\", \\"bid\\": 20.2, " + "\\"ask\\": 20.6}")))
That’s Java. Even if you can’t fully decipher it, you can get a rough idea of what it is supposed to do, build a rather complex API query.
Or you may be familiar with the following similar and frequent syntax in Python:
import seaborn as sns
sns.load_dataset('tips').sample(10, random_state=42).groupby('day').mean()
Here’s is how it works: multiple method calls are linked together in a single statement, spanning over one or several lines, usually because each method returns the same object or another object that supports further calls.
That technique is called method chaining and is popular in Object-Oriented Programming.
A few years ago, I looked for a way to write code like that in MATLAB too. And the answer is that it can be done in MATLAB as well, whevener you write your own class!
Implementing a method that can be chained is simply a matter of writing a method that returns the object itself.
In this article, I would like to show how to do it and what we can gain from such a syntax.
Example
A few years ago, I first sought how to implement that technique for a simulation launcher that had lots of parameters (far too many):
lauchSimulation(2014:2020, true, 'template', 'TmplProd', 'Priority', '+1', 'Memory', '+6000')
As you can see, that function takes 2 required inputs, and 3 named parameters (whose names aren’t even consistent, with ‘Priority’ and ‘Memory’ starting with an uppercase letter when ‘template’ doesn’t).
(The original function had many more parameters that I omit for the sake of brevity. You may also know of such functions in your own code that take a dozen parameters which you can remember the exact order.)
I thought it would be nice to replace that with:
SimulationLauncher() ...
.onYears(2014:2020) ...
.onDistributedCluster() ... % = equivalent of the previous "true"
.withTemplate('TmplProd') ...
.withPriority('+1') ...
.withReservedMemory('+6000') ...
.launch();
The first 6 lines create an object of class SimulationLauncher, calls several methods on that object to set the parameters, and lastly the method launch() is called, when all desired parameters have been set.
To make it cleared, the syntax previously shown could also be rewritten as:
launcher = SimulationLauncher();
launcher = launcher.onYears(2014:2020);
launcher = launcher.onDistributedCluster();
launcher = launcher.withTemplate('TmplProd');
launcher = launcher.withPriority('+1');
launcher = launcher.withReservedMemory('+6000');
launcher.launch();
Before we dive into how to implement that code, let’s examine the advantages and drawbacks of that syntax.
Benefits and drawbacks
Because I have extended the chained methods over several lines, it makes it easier to comment out or uncomment any one desired option, should the need arise. Furthermore, we need not bother any more with the order in which we set the parameters, whereas the usual syntax required that we memorize or check the documentation carefully for the order of the inputs.
More generally, chaining methods has the following benefits and a few drawbacks:
Benefits:
- Conciseness: Code becomes shorter and easier to write, by reducing visual noise compared to repeating the object name.
- Readability: Chained methods create a fluent, human-readable structure that makes intent clear.
- Reduced Temporary Variables: There's no need to create intermediary variables, as the methods directly operate on the object.
Drawbacks:
- Debugging Difficulty: If one method in a chain fails, it can be harder to isolate the issue. It effectively prevents setting breakpoints, inspecting intermediate values, and identifying which method failed.
- Readability Issues: Overly long and dense method chains can become hard to follow, reducing clarity.
- Side Effects: Methods that modify objects in place can lead to unintended side effects when used in long chains.
Implementation
In the SimulationLauncher class, the method lauch performs the main operation, while the other methods just serve as parameter setters. They take the object as input and return the object itself, after modifying it, so that other methods can be chained.
classdef SimulationLauncher
properties (GetAccess = private, SetAccess = private)
years_
isDistributed_ = false;
template_ = 'TestTemplate';
priority_ = '+2';
memory_ = '+5000';
end
methods
function varargout = launch(obj)
% perform whatever needs to be launched
% using the values of the properties stored in the object:
% obj.years_
% obj.template_
% etc.
end
function obj = onYears(obj, years)
assert(isnumeric(years))
obj.years_ = years;
end
function obj = onDistributedCluster(obj)
obj.isDistributed_ = true;
end
function obj = withTemplate(obj, template)
obj.template_ = template;
end
function obj = withPriority(obj, priority)
obj.priority_ = priority;
end
function obj = withMemory( obj, memory)
obj.memory_ = memory;
end
end
end
As you can see, each method can be in charge of verifying the correctness of its input, independantly. And what they do is just store the value of parameter inside the object. The class can define default values in the properties block.
You can configure different launchers from the same initial object, such as:
launcher = SimulationLauncher();
launcher = launcher.onYears(2014:2020);
launcher1 = launcher ...
.onDistributedCluster() ...
.withReservedMemory('+6000');
launcher2 = launcher ...
.withTemplate('TmplProd') ...
.withPriority('+1') ...
.withReservedMemory('+7000');
If you call the same method several times, only the last recorded value of the parameter will be taken into acount:
launcher = SimulationLauncher();
launcher = launcher ...
.withReservedMemory('+6000') ...
.onDistributedCluster() ...
.onYears(2014:2020) ...
.withReservedMemory('+7000') ...
.withReservedMemory('+8000');
% The value of "memory" will be '+8000'.
If the logic is still not clear to you, I advise you play a bit with the debugger to better understand what’s going on!
Conclusion
I love how the method chaining technique hides the minute detail that we don’t want to bother with when trying to understand what a piece of code does.
I hope this simple example has shown you how to apply it to write and organise your code in a more readable and convenient way.
Let me know if you have other questions, comments or suggestions. I may post other examples of that technique for other useful uses that I encountered in my experience.
I struggle with animations. I often want a simple scrollable animation and wind up having to export to some external viewer in some supported format. The new Live Script automation of animations fails and sabotages other methods and it is not well documented so even AIs are clueless how to resolve issues. Often an animation works natively but not with MATLAB Online. Animation of results seems to me rather basic and should be easier!
Frequently, I find myself doing things like the following,
xyz=rand(100,3);
XYZ=num2cell(xyz,1);
scatter3(XYZ{:,1:3})
But num2cell is time-consuming, not to mention that requiring it means extra lines of code. Is there any reason not to enable this syntax,
scatter3(xyz{:,1:3})
so that I one doesn't have to go through num2cell? Here, I adopt the rule that only dimensions that are not ':' will be comma-expanded.
In the sequence of previous suggestion in Meta Cody comment for the 'My Problems' page, I also suggest to add a red alert for new comments in 'My Groups' page.
Thank you in advance.
