R help - Jan 2007 - [fixed] vectorized nested loop: apply a function that takes two rows

(Extremely sorry, disregard previous email as I hit send before pasting the
latest version of the example; this one is smaller too)
Dear R users,

I want to apply a function that takes two vectors as input to all pairs
(combinations (nrow(X), 2))of matrix rows in a matrix.
I know that ideally, one should avoid loops in R, but after reading the docs for
do.call, apply, etc, I still don't know how to write the nested loop in a
vectorized way.

Example data:
x 		= matrix(rnorm(100), 10, 10)
# this is actually a very large sparse matrix, but it doesn't matter for the
# example
library(Matrix)
x = as(x,"CsparseMatrix")

# cosine function
cosine = function (x, y){
	if (is.vector(x) && is.vector(y)) {
		return(crossprod(x, y)/sqrt(crossprod(x) * crossprod(y)))
	} else {stop("cosine: argument mismatch. Two vectors needed as
input.")}
}

# The loop-based solution I have is:
		if (is(x, "Matrix") ) {
			cos 	= array(NA, c(ncol(x), ncol(x)))
			for (i in 2:ncol(x)) {
				for (j in 1:(i - 1)) {
					cos[i, j] = cosine(x[, i], x[, j])
				}
			}
		}

This solution seems inneficient. Is there an easy way of achieving this with a
clever do.call + apply combination?

Also, I have noticed that getting a row from a Matrix object produces a normal
array (i.e., it does not inherit Matrix class). However, selecting >1 rows,
does
produce a same-class matrix. If I convert with as() the output of selecting one
row, am I losing performance? Is there any way to make the resulting vector be a
1-D Matrix object?
This solution seems inneficient. Is there an easy way of achieving this with a
clever do.call + apply combination?
-- 
Thanks in advance,
-Jose

--
Jose Quesada, PhD
Research fellow, Psychology Dept.
Sussex University, Brighton, UK
http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/~jquesada

I am rusty on 'Matrix', but I see there are crossprod methods for those 
classes.

 	res <- crossprod( x , x )

gives your result up to scale factors of sqrt(res[i,i]*res[j,j]), so 
something like

 	diagnl <- Diagonal( ncol(x), sqrt( diag( res ) )

 	final.res <- diagnl %*% res %*% diagnl

should do it.

On Tue, 23 Jan 2007, Jose Quesada wrote:
> (Extremely sorry, disregard previous email as I hit send before pasting the
latest version of the example; this one is smaller too)
> Dear R users,
>
> I want to apply a function that takes two vectors as input to all pairs
> (combinations (nrow(X), 2))of matrix rows in a matrix.
> I know that ideally, one should avoid loops in R, but after reading the
docs for
> do.call, apply, etc, I still don't know how to write the nested loop in
a
> vectorized way.
>
> Example data:
> x 		= matrix(rnorm(100), 10, 10)
> # this is actually a very large sparse matrix, but it doesn't matter
for the
> # example
> library(Matrix)
> x = as(x,"CsparseMatrix")
>
> # cosine function
> cosine = function (x, y){
> 	if (is.vector(x) && is.vector(y)) {
> 		return(crossprod(x, y)/sqrt(crossprod(x) * crossprod(y)))
> 	} else {stop("cosine: argument mismatch. Two vectors needed as
input.")}
> }
>
> # The loop-based solution I have is:
> 		if (is(x, "Matrix") ) {
> 			cos 	= array(NA, c(ncol(x), ncol(x)))
> 			for (i in 2:ncol(x)) {
> 				for (j in 1:(i - 1)) {
> 					cos[i, j] = cosine(x[, i], x[, j])
> 				}
> 			}
> 		}
>
> This solution seems inneficient. Is there an easy way of achieving this
with a
> clever do.call + apply combination?
>
> Also, I have noticed that getting a row from a Matrix object produces a
normal
> array (i.e., it does not inherit Matrix class). However, selecting >1
rows, does
> produce a same-class matrix. If I convert with as() the output of selecting
one
> row, am I losing performance? Is there any way to make the resulting vector
be a
> 1-D Matrix object?
> This solution seems inneficient. Is there an easy way of achieving this
with a
> clever do.call + apply combination?
> -- 
> Thanks in advance,
> -Jose
>
> --
> Jose Quesada, PhD
> Research fellow, Psychology Dept.
> Sussex University, Brighton, UK
> http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/~jquesada
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-help at stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
> PLEASE do read the posting guide
http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
>
Charles C. Berry                        (858) 534-2098
                                          Dept of Family/Preventive Medicine
E mailto:cberry at tajo.ucsd.edu	         UC San Diego
http://biostat.ucsd.edu/~cberry/         La Jolla, San Diego 92093-0901

Hi Jose,
I'm answering your second batch of questions, since
Chuck Berry has already well done so with the first one
>>>>> "Jose" == Jose Quesada <quesada at
gmail.com>
>>>>>     on Tue, 23 Jan 2007 21:46:27 +0100 writes:
[........]

    Jose> # example
    Jose> library(Matrix)
    Jose> x = as(x,"CsparseMatrix")

[..........]

    Jose> Also, I have noticed that getting a row from a Matrix
    Jose> object produces a normal array (i.e., it does not
    Jose> inherit Matrix class). 

This is very much on purpose, following the principle of "least
surprise" so I'm surprised you're suprised.. :

The 'Matrix' behavior has been modelled to follow the more than
20 years old 'matrix' behavior :

 > matrix(1:9, 3) [,2]
 [1] 4 5 6
 > matrix(1:9, 3) [,2 , drop=FALSE]
      [,1]
 [1,]    4
 [2,]    5
 [3,]    6
 > library(Matrix)
 Loading required package: lattice
 > Matrix(1:9, 3) [,2]
 [1] 4 5 6
 > Matrix(1:9, 3) [,2, drop = FALSE]
 3 x 1 Matrix of class "dgeMatrix"
      [,1]
 [1,]    4
 [2,]    5
 [3,]    6
 > 

But then I should not be surprised, because
there has been the R FAQ
>> 7.5 Why do my matrices lose dimensions?
for quite a while.

*And* I think that there is only one "thing" in the S language
about which every "knowledgable one" agrees that it's a
"design
bug", and that's the fact that 'drop = TRUE' is the default,
and
not 'drop = FALSE' {but it's not possible to change now, please
don't start that discussion!}

    
Given what I say above, I wonder if our ("new-style") 'Matrix'
objects should not behave differently than ("old-style")
'matrix' and
indeed do use a default 'drop = FALSE'.
This might break some Matrix-based code though, but then
'Matrix' is young enough, and working Matrix indexing is much
younger,  and there are only about 4 CRAN/Bioconductor
packages depending on 'Matrix'.
--> This discussion (about changing this behavior in the
"Matrix" package) should definitely be lead on the R-devel
mailing list --> CC'ing to R-devel
{hence one (but please *only* one !) cross-post}

    Jose> However, selecting >1 rows,
    Jose> does produce a same-class matrix. If I convert with
    Jose> as() the output of selecting one row, am I losing
    Jose> performance? Is there any way to make the resulting
    Jose> vector be a 1-D Matrix object?

yes, ", drop = FALSE", see above

Martin

Thanks Charles, Martin,

Substantial improvement with the vectorized solution. Here is a quick benchmark:

# The loop-based solution:
nestedCos = function (x) {
	if (is(x, "Matrix") ) {
		cos 	= array(NA, c(ncol(x), ncol(x)))
		for (i in 2:ncol(x)) {
			for (j in 1:(i - 1)) {
				cos[i, j] = cosine(x[, i], x[, j])
			}
		}
	}
	return(cos)
}
# Charles C. Berry's vectorized approach
flatCos = function (x) {
	res    		= crossprod( x , x )
	diagnl 		= Diagonal( ncol(x), 1 / sqrt( diag( res )))
	cos 		 	= diagnl %*% res %*% diagnl
	return(cos)
}

Benchmarking:
> system.time(for(i in 1:10)nestedCos(x))
(I stopped because it was taking too long)
Timing stopped at: 139.37 3.82 188.76 NA NA
> system.time(for(i in 1:10)flatCos(x))
[1] 0.43 0.00 0.48   NA   NA

#------------------------------------------------------
As much as I like to have faster code, I'm still wondering WHY flatCos gets
the same results; i.e., why multiplying the inverse sqrt root of the diagonal of
x BY x, then BY the diagonal again produces the expected result. I checked the
wikipedia page for crossprod and other sources, but it still eludes me. I can
see that scaling by the sqrt of the diagonal once makes sense with 'res
<- crossprod( x , x ) gives your result up to scale factors of
sqrt(res[i,i]*res[j,j])', but I still don't see why you need to
postmultiply by the diagonal again.

Maybe trying to attack a simpler problem might help my understanding: e.g.,
calculating the cos of a column to all other colums of x (that is, the inner
part of the nested loop). How would that work in a vectorized way? I'm
trying to get some general technique that I can reuse later from this excellent
answer.

Thanks,
-Jose
>
>
> I am rusty on 'Matrix', but I see there are crossprod methods for
those
> classes.
>
> 	res <- crossprod( x , x )
>
> gives your result up to scale factors of sqrt(res[i,i]*res[j,j]), so
> something like
>
> 	diagnl <- Diagonal( ncol(x), sqrt( diag( res ) )
>
OOPS! Better make that

   	diagnl <- Diagonal( ncol(x), 1 / sqrt( diag( res ) )
>
> 	final.res <- diagnl %*% res %*% diagnl
>
> should do it.
>
-- 
Cheers,
-Jose

--
Jose Quesada, PhD
Research fellow, Psychology Dept.
Sussex University, Brighton, UK
http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/~jquesada