| Re: Matrix algebra and index order, A # B vs A ## B [message #79654] |
Mon, 26 March 2012 06:00  |
David Fanning
Messages: 11724
Registered: August 2001
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Mats Löfdahl writes:
> IDL has two operators for matrix multiplication, # and ##.
> The former assumes the matrices involved have colum number as
> the first index and row number as the second, i.e., A_{rc} =
> A[c,r] with mathematics on the LHS and IDL on the RHS. The
> latter operator makes the opposite assumption, A_{rc} = A[r,c].
>
> I believe much headache can be avoided if one chooses one
> notation and sticks with it. If it were only me, I'd choose
> the A_{rc} = A[r,c] notation. But it isn't only me, because
> I like to take advantage of IDL routines written by others.
> So, has there merged some kind of consensus among influential
> IDL programmers (those that write publicly available
> routines that are widely used - thank you BTW!) for
> which convention to use?
Yes, the consensus that has emerged is that no operation
is more fraught with ambiguity, anguish, and frustration
than trying to translate a section of linear algebra code
from a paper or textbook (say on Principle Components
Analysis) to IDL than almost anything you can imagine!
It's like practicing backwards writing in the mirror.
And, of course, while you are doing it you have the
growing realization that there is no freaking way you
are EVER going to be able to write the on-line
documentation to explain this dog's dish of a program
to anyone else. :-(
The solution, of course, is to stick with the ##
notation for as long as it makes sense, then throw
in a couple of # signs whenever needed to make the
math come out right. :-)
Cheers,
David
--
David Fanning, Ph.D.
Fanning Software Consulting, Inc.
Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.idlcoyote.com/
Sepore ma de ni thui. ("Perhaps thou speakest truth.")
|
|
|
|
| Re: Matrix algebra and index order, A # B vs A ## B [message #79716 is a reply to message #79654] |
Tue, 27 March 2012 09:01  |
mort.canty
Messages: 9
Registered: March 2009
|
Junior Member |
|
|
On 26 Mrz., 15:00, David Fanning <n...@idlcoyote.com> wrote:
> Yes, the consensus that has emerged is that no operation
> is more fraught with ambiguity, anguish, and frustration
> than trying to translate a section of linear algebra code
> from a paper or textbook (say on Principle Components
> Analysis) to IDL than almost anything you can imagine!
> It's like practicing backwards writing in the mirror.
>
Amen. I've been playing with the idea of a new edition of my book with
both IDL *and* Python coding examples. If it doesn't appear, either
I've dropped the idea or you can look for me in an Asylum for the
column-major/row-major insane.
Mort
|
|
|
|
| Re: Matrix algebra and index order, A # B vs A ## B [message #79751 is a reply to message #79654] |
Mon, 26 March 2012 06:45 |
Mats Löfdahl
Messages: 263
Registered: January 2012
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Monday, March 26, 2012 3:00:05 PM UTC+2, David Fanning wrote:
> Mats Löfdahl writes:
>
>> IDL has two operators for matrix multiplication, # and ##.
>> The former assumes the matrices involved have colum number as
>> the first index and row number as the second, i.e., A_{rc} =
>> A[c,r] with mathematics on the LHS and IDL on the RHS. The
>> latter operator makes the opposite assumption, A_{rc} = A[r,c].
>>
>> I believe much headache can be avoided if one chooses one
>> notation and sticks with it. If it were only me, I'd choose
>> the A_{rc} = A[r,c] notation. But it isn't only me, because
>> I like to take advantage of IDL routines written by others.
>> So, has there emerged some kind of consensus among influential
>> IDL programmers (those that write publicly available
>> routines that are widely used - thank you BTW!) for
>> which convention to use?
>
> Yes, the consensus that has emerged is that no operation
> is more fraught with ambiguity, anguish, and frustration
> than trying to translate a section of linear algebra code
> from a paper or textbook (say on Principle Components
> Analysis) to IDL than almost anything you can imagine!
> It's like practicing backwards writing in the mirror.
>
> And, of course, while you are doing it you have the
> growing realization that there is no freaking way you
> are EVER going to be able to write the on-line
> documentation to explain this dog's dish of a program
> to anyone else. :-(
>
> The solution, of course, is to stick with the ##
> notation for as long as it makes sense, then throw
> in a couple of # signs whenever needed to make the
> math come out right. :-)
It's that bad? :o)
One thing that had me wondering is the documentation for Craig Markwardt's qrfac routine:
; Given an MxN matrix A (M>N), the procedure QRFAC computes the QR
; decomposition (factorization) of A. This factorization is useful
; in least squares applications solving the equation, A # x = B.
; Together with the procedure QRSOLV, this equation can be solved in
; a least squares sense.
;
; The QR factorization produces two matrices, Q and R, such that
;
; A = Q ## R
;
; where Q is orthogonal such that TRANSPOSE(Q)##Q equals the identity
; matrix, and R is upper triangular.
The ## operator for the matrix-matrix multiplications but # for matrix-vector multiplication! But then I thought this might be IDL 1D arrays being interpreted as row vectors so x # A is actually just another way of writing A ## transpose(x). And the former would be more efficient. Am I on the right track here...?
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
