From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1858 invoked by alias); 25 Mar 2014 21:56:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gsl-discuss-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gsl-discuss-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 1846 invoked by uid 89); 25 Mar 2014 21:56:29 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=1.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_05,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-pa0-f52.google.com Received: from mail-pa0-f52.google.com (HELO mail-pa0-f52.google.com) (209.85.220.52) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 21:56:27 +0000 Received: by mail-pa0-f52.google.com with SMTP id rd3so1030206pab.25 for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 14:56:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=xeRNzwQGIKekImcr4LjNMz7I5COXKdXFKbNYr1fuIxo=; b=PfQjKffhja3kKrTFh+Ht9nsmVYgGk/5r2P1Ids2zwBWJHoGKqlH1PyaVkVXIS8pNt7 Eg9RHSZpKN28SS232ouKMDxYztvnH7mEFj9llBQYPe1wjFpR0LQQkzproWmDeQ8tFW4k x4ynWvW0F9GJmBKcrSwl/LTK/Od9ZXpVuNQG+gWLWnkmdr8GfUcKc1pEHgFgN11lALCN gpj2EuPoxBTB5AoDUywpNLZmEVw4bsHn2ff+h6AKe5LYO7L6bMVRh2YAgNGXR5TPGwM9 IWoN312S2Sg7i/L2FgcKvkS8XH9iFZmjb19oIHqiD+YhOf5AZKrHSRH5q9PLEKnQw/Pm iprA== X-Received: by 10.68.224.195 with SMTP id re3mr81546106pbc.93.1395784585358; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 14:56:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dhcp-128-189-74-162.ubcsecure.wireless.ubc.ca (dhcp-128-189-74-162.ubcsecure.wireless.ubc.ca. [128.189.74.162]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id wp3sm49227667pbc.67.2014.03.25.14.56.24 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 25 Mar 2014 14:56:24 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) Subject: Re: Compiling & Testing New Interpolation Type From: =?windows-1252?Q?Jean-Fran=E7ois_Caron?= In-Reply-To: <532B33B2.6060903@colorado.edu> Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 21:56:00 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <57ABFACA-CA7C-439D-9695-F136F0142156@phas.ubc.ca> <5328EF5C.5010300@colorado.edu> <0665FACA-1454-4C7C-80B5-30D08E71A1B7@phas.ubc.ca> <5329F67E.7080203@colorado.edu> <532A124B.4090608@colorado.edu> <532A13D0.2050609@colorado.edu> <8EA5CA7B-E4C4-48A0-A9EB-BA77F3F1AC11@phas.ubc.ca> <532B23E3.7050700@colorado.edu> <532B2ACF.1060608@colorado.edu> <532B2D8E.8090902@colorado.edu> <532B33B2.6060903@colorado.edu> To: gsl-discuss@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2014-q1/txt/msg00030.txt.bz2 I=92ve improved my initial code greatly. You can find it here: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~jfcaron/+junk/my_steffen/files You can compile it into GSL by adding in the interpolation/Makefile referen= ces to =93steffen.c=94, =93steffen.lo=94, and =93steffen.Plo=94 exactly whe= re there are currently references to =93akima.*=94. I=92ve tried adding an =93integ=94 method, but I=92m afraid I don=92t even = understand the workings of the integ methods for the existing interpolation= types. I couldn=92t just copy from the akima.c integ method because they = use a build-in spline calculation function (which I also don=92t understand= ). Reading uncommented C code is pretty hard. My test program shows that = the integration method isn=92t obviously broken, but it fails the tests I w= rote in interpolation/test.c The actual interpolation and derivatives seem= to work and pass the tests. I=92ve not used github before, so I guess my next move should be to learn t= he basics and start using that, since otherwise describing my additions & c= hanges are hard to follow. In the meantime, is anyone able to explain how = the heck the =93integ=94 methods work? Jean-Fran=E7ois On Mar 20, 2014, at 11:30 , Patrick Alken wrot= e: > Yes that green curve is rather strange and doesn't seem much better than = the cubic spline. I like simplicity too so lets proceed with importing the = steffen code. >=20 > On 03/20/2014 12:18 PM, Jean-Fran=E7ois Caron wrote: >> Definitely an advantage of a) is that it is conceptually simple. b) is = 44 pages while a) is only 7. Even if b) is somehow mathematically superior= , I like the idea of understanding the tools that I am using (and being abl= e to explain it to my academic supervisor/conference attendees). >>=20 >> The MESA astrophysics library (C++ unfortunately) actually includes both= types, and has a little graph to show differences: >> http://mesa.sourceforge.net/interp_1D.html >>=20 >> Actually their graph is confusing, blue is supposed to be a), green b), = but the green curve isn=92t piece-wise monotonic between the data points. = I=92m starting to think maybe Stetten and Huynh mean different things when = they say =93monotonic=94. I=92ll try to read Huynh=92s paper to see if the= y define what they are trying to do. Steffen is pretty clear about his tec= hnique being a for an interpolating function that is monotonic between data= points - i.e. the interpolating function doesn=92t change sign between dat= a points, and extrema can only occur at said data points. >>=20 >> Jean-Fran=E7ois >>=20 >> On Mar 20, 2014, at 11:03 , Patrick Alken w= rote: >>=20 >>> I see question 1) is answered by section 4 of Steffen's paper - the met= hod works on all data sets, and preserves monotonicity in each interval, wh= ich is nice. They also state that method (c) has some serious drawbacks. >>>=20 >>> Unfortunately paper (b) doesn't reference (a) and so its difficult to t= ell whether (b) offers any advantage over (a) >>>=20 >>> On 03/20/2014 11:52 AM, Patrick Alken wrote: >>>> Hi, I'm moving this discussion over to gsl-discuss which is more suited >>>> for development issues. >>>>=20 >>>> I have 2 naive questions which you may be able to answer since you've >>>> been working on this code. >>>>=20 >>>> 1) If the Steffen algorithm is applied to non-monotonic data, will it >>>> still provide a solution or does the method encounter an error? >>>>=20 >>>> 2) Earlier on the GSL list it was mentioned that there are 3 different >>>> methods for interpolating monotonic data: >>>>=20 >>>> (a) M.Steffen, "A simple method for monotonic interpolation in one >>>> dimension", Astron. Astrophys. 239, 443-450 (1990). >>>>=20 >>>> (b) H.T.Huynh, "Accurate Monotone Cubic Interpolation", SIAM J. Numer. >>>> Anal. 30, 57-100 (1993). >>>>=20 >>>> (c) Fritsch, F. N.; Carlson, R. E., "Monotone Piecewise Cubic >>>> Interpolation", SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 17 (2), 238=96246 (1980). >>>>=20 >>>> I haven't looked at (c) but it seems that (a) and (b) both use piecewi= se >>>> cubic polynomials and preserve monotonicity. Do you happen to know if >>>> one method is superior to the other? If one method is significantly >>>> better than the other two it would make more sense to include that one >>>> in GSL. >>>>=20 >>>> Patrick >>>>=20 >>>> On 03/20/2014 11:37 AM, Jean-Fran=E7ois Caron wrote: >>>>> Yes, I didn=92t bother doing the integration function at the time bec= ause I was having trouble just compiling. I will add the integration funct= ion, and re-write the eval and deriv/deriv2 functions to use Horner=92s sch= eme for the polynomials. I can generate some comparison graphs using fake = data like in Steffen=92s paper, that sounds easy enough. >>>>>=20 >>>>> I=92ll look at the interpolation/test.c file and see if I can come up= with similar tests. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Thanks for offering to help with the integration into GSL itself. I = don=92t know a lot of the procedures (or even politics sometimes!) involved. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Jean-Fran=E7ois >>>>>=20 >>>>> On Mar 20, 2014, at 10:22 , Patrick Alken wrote: >>>>>=20 >>>>>> I did notice you talking about 1.6 in your earlier messages, but ass= umed it was a typo and you meant 1.16, oops. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> On 03/20/2014 11:11 AM, Jean-Fran=E7ois Caron wrote: >>>>>>> My original problem was that I wanted to add an interpolation type = to GSL. Specifically I want monotonic cubic-splines following the descript= ion in Steffen (1990): http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1990A%26A...239..443S >>>>>> I took a quick look at your code earlier and it looks pretty nice. I= noticed you commented out the _integ function - is this something you coul= d add to make it feature complete with the other interpolation types? >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> It is important to add automated tests for this. Can you look at int= erpolation/test.c and design similar tests for your new method? Also I thin= k it would be nice to add a figure to the manual illustrating the differenc= es between cubic, akima, and your new steffen method (similar to the figure= s in the Steffen paper). This would help users a lot when trying to decide = what method to use. Do you happen to have a dataset which shows a nice cont= rast like Figs 1, 3 and 8 from that paper? >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> When everything is ready I would be happy to add it to GSL, as we ar= e already planning to update the interpolation module for the next release.= When I find some time I want to import the 2D interpolation extension disc= ussed previously, and also add Hermite interpolation. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> It would be easiest for us if you could clone the GSL git repository= and make your changes there. You could make a new branch called 'steffen' = or something and publish it to github, or just send a patch file to me, whi= chever is easiest. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Patrick >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> On Mar 19, 2014, at 18:40 , Dave Allured - NOAA Affiliate wrote: >>>>>>>> More data. I tried the same plain build recipe, GSL 1.16 on our t= est >>>>>>>> machine which is at Mac OS 10.9.3. Got another perfect build, no = make >>>>>>>> check errors, no PPC-related issues. Outputs on request, please be >>>>>>>> specific. >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> CC=3Dclang >>>>>>>> CFLAGS=3D-g >>>>>>>> ./configure --prefix /Users/dallured/Disk/3rd/gsl/1.16.os10.9 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> mac27:~/Disk/3rd/gsl/1.16.os10.9 57> sw_vers >>>>>>>> ProductName: Mac OS X >>>>>>>> ProductVersion: 10.9.3 >>>>>>>> BuildVersion: 13D17 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> mac27:~/Disk/3rd/gsl/1.16.os10.9/src 36> \ >>>>>>>> ? grep -i '# [a-z]' ../logfiles/make-check.0319a.log | sort | uniq= -c >>>>>>>> 45 # ERROR: 0 >>>>>>>> 45 # FAIL: 0 >>>>>>>> 42 # PASS: 1 >>>>>>>> 3 # PASS: 2 >>>>>>>> 45 # SKIP: 0 >>>>>>>> 42 # TOTAL: 1 >>>>>>>> 3 # TOTAL: 2 >>>>>>>> 45 # XFAIL: 0 >>>>>>>> 45 # XPASS: 0 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> mac27:~/Disk/3rd/gsl/1.16.os10.9 62> \ >>>>>>>> ? grep -c -i ppc logfiles/*319a*log >>>>>>>> logfiles/configure.0319a.os10.9.log:0 >>>>>>>> logfiles/install.0319a.log:0 >>>>>>>> logfiles/make-check.0319a.log:0 >>>>>>>> logfiles/make.0319a.log:0 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> mac27:~/Disk/3rd/gsl/1.16.os10.9 65> \ >>>>>>>> ? grep -i ppc src/config.h src/config.log src/config.status >>>>>>>> src/config.h:/* #undef HAVE_GNUPPC_IEEE_INTERFACE */ >>>>>>>> src/config.log:HAVE_GNUPPC_IEEE_INTERFACE=3D'' >>>>>>>> src/config.status:S["HAVE_GNUPPC_IEEE_INTERFACE"]=3D"" >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> --Dave >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Jean-Francois Caron >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> Dave is correct, I am using an "i686" 64-bit x86 mac. For some r= eason >>>>>>>>> it is still looking for the PPC mac header file. The ./configure >>>>>>>>> stage correctly identifies my system, so it's a bit strange. Als= o GSL >>>>>>>>> installs without errors when I do it from MacPorts, and MacPorts >>>>>>>>> doesn't seem to do anything other than ./configure && make, from = my >>>>>>>>> reading of the portfile. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> When I get back to my Mac, I will look at the NOTES file to see if >>>>>>>>> anything needs to be done for 10.9. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Jean-Fran=E7ois >=20