Efficient Multiplication of Submatrices whose results are to be safed in Submatrices

5 views (last 30 days)
Hey Guys,
trying to find an efficient solution for quite some time now.
Given two matrices A,B, say both of size 1000x1000, compute A(1:100,1:100)*B(1:100,1:100) and safe that in (overwrite) A(1:100,1:100).
What's the most efficient way to do that? Since it is a mantra for Matlab to always preallocate, I precisely did that with worse results than before (before: appending new row and column in each loop). I've read about efficient BLAS-routines in Fortran and C for multiplying submatrices and saving the result in submatrices since there they don't actually "extract" a submatrix but merely point to which parts of the matrices you want to multiply and therefore you can still make use of the efficient routines available. Are there similar routines for Matlab or could you provide me with a mex-file since I can't program in C?
Original way without preallocation (exemplary, simplified code, say matrix A consists of my data):
The first part takes roughly 16 seconds, the second 14 seconds even though I preallocated. Having read some threads, I've heard that this is due to Matlab having to copy the submatrix at every extraction step and therefore having to find new memory.
In my real code, actually the latter variant is way slower than the first one. I can post it, if anyone is interested.
Thanks in advance!
tic
A=1;
for j=1:1000
A=[A zeros(j,1);zeros(1,j) 1]*rand(j+1,j+1);
end
toc
tic
B=zeros(1000,1000);
for j=1:1000
B(j+1,j+1)=1;
B(1:j+1,1:j+1)=B(1:j+1,1:j+1)*rand(j+1,j+1);
end
toc
  2 Comments
Benjamin Kiefer
Benjamin Kiefer on 15 Mar 2019
Thanks for your answer!
Two reply questions:
1.
"That part can easily be done in a mex routine"
But it can be done with traditional Matlab as well, since it is already implemented there? Or what it is the advantage of doing it via a mex file?
2.
How can I take special care s.t. the variables are not shared using purely Matlab?
Best

Sign in to comment.

Answers (1)

amin ya
amin ya on 13 Mar 2019
Edited: amin ya on 13 Mar 2019
Why you don't simly use :
A(1:100,1:100)*B(1:100,1:100)
Matlab matrix multiplication already uses parallelization which is very fast
for preallocation use:
A=rand([1000,1000],'distributed')
B=rand([1000,1000],'distributed')
  1 Comment
Benjamin Kiefer
Benjamin Kiefer on 14 Mar 2019
Because in my actual code, extracting submatrices and multiplying them together just to be saved in submatrices again takes way longer than iteratively adding a column and row. Just as described in the little example method 2 takes equally much time compared to method 1 even though it's just a bunch of (sub)matrix multiplications. Is the only way to write in C?
My matrices are not too so big that distributing is worth doing. At least at my tests it performed much worse.

Sign in to comment.

Community Treasure Hunt

Find the treasures in MATLAB Central and discover how the community can help you!

Start Hunting!