| Re: Need Some Advice on Seperating Out Some Data [message #49723 is a reply to message #49667] |
Thu, 10 August 2006 11:44   |
rdellsy
Messages: 11
Registered: August 2006
|
Junior Member |
|
|
With the generated numbers, it seemd to work fine. Here is a comma
delimited version (.csv) of my data:
http://s2.quicksharing.com/v/6325147/bm.csv.html
With that and Excel (or your speadsheet application of choice), you
should be able to get just about any data format out of that.
Thanks,
Rob
JD Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 13:13:12 -0700, rdellsy wrote:
>
>> Thanks for that. I took it, and played around with it a bit to get it
>> to work. [Errors I found were: x and y don't concatinate in the line
>> 'array=transpose([[x],[y]])' and I found I had to comment away the
>> /ISOTROPIC in the plotting.) Unfortunately, it seems that cluster
>> seperates on a purely 1 dimensional basis. I tried discarding the
>> histogram related code in favor of a much simpler system in case that
>> was the problem, and it still didn't work. If you look at the data set
>> I provided, the problem should be self evident.
>
> Probably your x,y are column vectors. I can't parse that data set;
> please repost in plain ASCII. I'm not sure why you say it works
> 1-dimensionally. Did you try the example as given with the fake cluster
> data?
>
>> Incidentally, I replaced everything from
>> h=histogram(c,reverse_indices=ri) down to the second to last line with:
>> --
>> plot,x,y,psym=2
>> bmax=max(array[0,*],maxsubsc)
>> goodc=c[maxsubsc]
>> keep=where(c[*] eq goodc)
>> --
>> I feel that my code may be a tad more efficient, though I don't know
>> how efficient the WHERE command is.
>
> HISTOGRAM is more efficient than WHERE, but then again if it's not slowing
> you down, it's a bit harder to parse, and you're only searching on a few
> cluster index values. You don't need c[*] above: that just slows things
> down unnecessarily.
>
>> Anywho, I'm looking CLUSTER_TREE right now, which shows some more
>> promise. If I understand it correctly, it works using distance appart,
>> not coordinates which is a bit more useful, I think, for my problem.
>> I'm just not sure how I can take the output and turn it into a set of
>> clusters.
>
> I think CLUSTER does similar, it just doesn't build a "tree" of
> cluster membership.
>
> JD
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
