Just for fun I wrote an equivalent program in C and tested the Sage
function and an equivalent C program on 1 instance of the problem.
===
$ time ./a.out test
real 0m0.366s
user 0m0.306s
sys 0m0.060s
===
And Sage
===
$ time sage test.sage test
real 2m6.285s
user 2m5.256s
sys 0m0.858s
===
I thought that may be interesting to you as well.
Best,
Jernej
On Wednesday, 3 December 2014 22:33:46 UTC+1, Jernej wrote:
>
> Dear sage-support,
>
> I have stumbled into a performance bottleneck in one of my Sage programs.
> I would like to share the relevant problem here in hope anyone has a
> constructive suggestion for optimizing the given program.
>
> I am given a n x n, (0,1) matrix C where n < 20. C has up to 30% of
> nonzero elements.
>
> I define the inner product <u,v> = u (2I - C) v^t and need to compute the
> set S of all (0,1) n-vectors u such that <u,u> = 2 and <u,j> = -1, where j
> is the vector with all ones. Finally I need to record all pairs u,v from S
> such that <u,v> == -1 or 0.
>
> The one optimization that I use is to cache the product u*(2I-C). Other
> than that I don't see any other way to optimize the program hence it looks
> like
>
> ====
> global vectors
> field = RR # this looks like the fastest option
>
> def init_vectors(n):
> global vectors
> vectors = [matrix(field,b) for b in product(*[[0,1]]*n)]
> def foo(C,output):
>
> global vectors
>
> n = C.nrows()
> # we compute the inverse in QQ just to gain a bit of numerical
> stability
> D = (2*identity_matrix(n)-C).inverse()
> D = Matrix(field,D)
>
> j = matrix(field, tuple([1 for _ in xrange(n)]))
> cur = 1
>
> vec2int = {}
> cache = {}
>
> for bm in vectors:
> val = bm*D
> if abs( (val*bm.transpose())[0,0]-2) <= 0.000001 and
> abs((val*j.transpose())[0,0]+1) <= 0.000001:
> vec2int[cur] = bm
> output.write(str(el for el in bm[0])+'\n')
> cache[cur] = val
> cur+=1
>
> for i in xrange(1, cur):
> for j in xrange(i+1, cur):
> iv = (cache[i]*vec2int[j].transpose())[0,0]
> if abs(iv) <= 0.0000001 or abs(iv+1) <= 0.000001:
> output.write(str(i) + ' ' + str(j) + '\n')
> ===
>
> For convenience's sake I have attached the result of %prun on one instance
> of the problem. From the output of prun I suppose it would make sense to
> cache the transpose of the vectors as well, though I am not sure this is
> going to make the crucial difference.
>
> On average it takes 200s to process one matrix and given that I have
> millions of such matrices it would take years to process all the input.
>
> Other than rewriting the whole thing in C I currently do not see any
> viable solution. Hence I am wondering: Do you guys happen to see any clever
> optimization? Is there a way to compute the named product more efficiently?
>
> Best,
>
> Jernej
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-support" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
