The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Math Forum » Discussions » Software » comp.soft-sys.matlab

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: sub-pixel shifting of a matrix
Replies: 14   Last Post: Feb 7, 2013 12:23 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Bruno Luong

Posts: 9,822
Registered: 7/26/08
Re: sub-pixel shifting of a matrix
Posted: Feb 7, 2013 12:23 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

"Matt J" wrote in message <kf0lu4$eph$>...
> "Bruno Luong" <b.luong@fogale.findmycountry> wrote in message
> That doesn't explain why the 3rd version was the slowest. The 3rd version uses a 10+10 tensorial operation so since 10+10 << 10*10, you would expect the 3rd version to be faster (or comparable to) the others.

This is an independent question, and a little OT. But here is few elements of explanation:

I imagine on the implementation side, the first and second input arguments of CONV2 is not symmetric. There should be an outer loop and inner loop must be on 1st/2nd arguments (or the opposite). Also the sum is carried out on a direct/flipped memory arrangement of the arguments. That can make a huge difference espectially considering the computer cache system that is not symmetric in the memory reading.

The lesson here is that one should put the large array as first argument of conv/conv2, which is probably the marojity of the cases in practice.


Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.