首页
学习
活动
专区
圈层
工具
发布
社区首页 >问答首页 >求子矩阵上逐行最大值的最快方法

求子矩阵上逐行最大值的最快方法
EN

Stack Overflow用户
提问于 2019-02-24 11:04:31
回答 1查看 247关注 0票数 1

在性能关键的代码中,我得到了两个大型矩阵(以千为单位)。

期望、实现

大小相同但包含不同值的。这些矩阵都是以相同的方式在列上划分的,每个子矩阵都有不同的列数。就像这样

代码语言:javascript
复制
submat1     submat2     submat3
-----------------------------
|...........| .......| .....|
|...........| .......| .....|
|...........| .......| .....|
|...........| .......| .....|
|...........| .......| .....|
-----------------------------

我需要最快的方法(用伪码)来填充第三个矩阵

代码语言:javascript
复制
for each submatrix
    for each row in submatrix
        pos= argmax(expectations(row,start_submatrix(col):end_submatrix(col)))
        result(row,col) =  realization(row,pos)

也就是说,对于每个子矩阵,我扫描每一行,找出期望子矩阵中最大元素的位置,并将实现矩阵的对应值放入结果矩阵中。

我希望有最快的方法来实现这一点,也许可以通过智能并行/缓存优化来实现,因为这个函数是我花费大约40%的时间在算法中的地方。我使用VisualStudio15.9.6和Windows10。

这是我的参考C++实现,在这里我使用Armadillo (列主要)矩阵。

代码语言:javascript
复制
#include <iostream>
#include <chrono>
#include <vector>

///Trivial implementation, for illustration purposes
void find_max_vertical_trivial(const arma::mat& expectations, const arma::mat& realizations, arma::mat& results, const arma::uvec & list, const int max_size_action)
{
    const int number_columns_results = results.n_cols;
    const int number_rows = expectations.n_rows;
#pragma omp parallel for schedule(static)
    for (int submatrix_to_process = 0; submatrix_to_process < number_columns_results; submatrix_to_process++)
    {
        const int start_loop = submatrix_to_process * max_size_action;
        //Looping over rows
        for (int current_row = 0; current_row < number_rows; current_row++)
        {
            int candidate = start_loop;
            const int end_loop = candidate + list(submatrix_to_process);
            //Finding the optimal action
            for (int act = candidate + 1; act < end_loop; act++)
            {
                if (expectations(current_row, act) > expectations(current_row, candidate))
                    candidate = act;
            }
            //Placing the corresponding realization into the results
            results(current_row, submatrix_to_process) = realizations(current_row, candidate);
        }
    }
}

这是我想出的最快的方法。有可能改进吗?

代码语言:javascript
复制
///Stripped all armadillo functionality, to bare C
void find_max_vertical_optimized(const arma::mat& expectations, const arma::mat& realizations, arma::mat& values, const arma::uvec & list, const int max_block)
{
    const int n_columns = values.n_cols;
    const int number_rows = expectations.n_rows;
    const auto exp_ptr = expectations.memptr();
    const auto real_ptr = realizations.memptr();
    const auto values_ptr = values.memptr();
    const auto list_ptr = list.memptr();
#pragma omp parallel for schedule(static)
    for (int col_position = 0; col_position < n_columns; col_position++)
    {
        const int start_loop = col_position * max_block*number_rows;
        const int end_loop = start_loop + list_ptr[col_position]*number_rows;
        const int position_value = col_position * number_rows;
        for (int row_position = 0; row_position < number_rows; row_position++)
        {
            int candidate = start_loop;
            const auto st_exp = exp_ptr + row_position;
            const auto st_real = real_ptr + row_position;
            const auto st_val = values_ptr + row_position;
            for (int new_candidate = candidate + number_rows; new_candidate < end_loop; new_candidate+= number_rows)
            {
                if (st_exp[new_candidate] > st_exp[candidate])
                    candidate = new_candidate;
            }
            st_val[position_value] = st_real[candidate];
        }
    }
}

以及测试部分,在这里我比较了性能

代码语言:javascript
复制
typedef std::chrono::microseconds dur;
const double dur2seconds = 1e6;

//Testing the two methods
int main()
{
    const int max_cols_submatrix = 6; //Typical size: 3-100
    const int n_test = 500;
    const int number_rows = 2000;   //typical size: 1000-10000
    std::vector<int> size_to_test = {4,10,40,100,1000,5000 }; //typical size: 10-5000
    arma::vec time_test(n_test, arma::fill::zeros);
    arma::vec time_trivial(n_test, arma::fill::zeros);

    for (const auto &size_grid : size_to_test) {
        arma::mat expectations(number_rows, max_cols_submatrix*size_grid, arma::fill::randn);
        arma::mat realizations(number_rows, max_cols_submatrix*size_grid, arma::fill::randn);
        arma::mat reference_values(number_rows, size_grid, arma::fill::zeros);
        arma::mat optimized_values(number_rows, size_grid, arma::fill::zeros);
        arma::uvec number_columns_per_submatrix(size_grid);
        //Generate random number of columns per each submatrices
        number_columns_per_submatrix= arma::conv_to<arma::uvec>::from(arma::vec(size_grid,arma::fill::randu)*max_cols_submatrix);
        for (int i = 0; i < n_test; i++) {
            auto st_meas = std::chrono::high_resolution_clock::now();
            find_max_vertical_trivial(expectations, realizations, optimized_values, number_columns_per_submatrix, max_cols_submatrix);
            time_trivial(i) = std::chrono::duration_cast<dur>(std::chrono::high_resolution_clock::now() - st_meas).count() / dur2seconds;;
            st_meas = std::chrono::high_resolution_clock::now();
            find_max_vertical_optimized(expectations, realizations, reference_values, number_columns_per_submatrix, max_cols_submatrix);
            time_test(i) = std::chrono::duration_cast<dur>(std::chrono::high_resolution_clock::now() - st_meas).count() / dur2seconds;
            const auto diff = arma::sum(arma::sum(arma::abs(reference_values - optimized_values)));
            if (diff > 1e-3)
            {
                std::cout <<"Error: " <<diff << "\n";
                throw std::runtime_error("Error");
            }
        }
        std::cout <<"grid size:"<< size_grid << "\n";
        const double mean_time_trivial = arma::mean(time_trivial);
        const double mean_time_opt = arma::mean(time_test);

        std::cout << "Trivial: "<< mean_time_trivial << " s +/-" << 1.95*arma::stddev(time_trivial) / sqrt(n_test) <<"\n";
        std::cout << "Optimized: "<< mean_time_opt <<" s ("<< (mean_time_opt/ mean_time_trivial-1)*100.0 <<" %) "<<"+/-" << 1.95*arma::stddev(time_test) / sqrt(n_test)  << "\n";
    }
}
EN

回答 1

Stack Overflow用户

回答已采纳

发布于 2019-02-27 04:39:25

您可能可以使用SIMD循环优化缓存,该循环可能读取8或12个完整的行向量,然后为下一列读取相同的行。(因此对于32位元素,8*4或8*8行并行)。您使用的是MSVC,它支持x86 SSE2 / AVX2本质,如_mm256_load_ps_mm256_max_ps,或_mm256_max_epi32

如果您从对齐边界开始,那么希望您能够读取您所接触的所有缓存行。然后输出中相同的访问模式。(因此,您正在读取2到6个连续的缓存行,在读/写块之间跨出一大步。)

或者可能将tmp结果记录在紧凑的某个地方(每行每段1值),然后再将更多的缓存写入每个列中相同元素的副本。但是,这两种方法都可以尝试;混合读写可能会让CPU更好地重叠工作,并发现更多的内存级并行性。

票数 1
EN
页面原文内容由Stack Overflow提供。腾讯云小微IT领域专用引擎提供翻译支持
原文链接:

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/54851222

复制
相关文章

相似问题

领券
问题归档专栏文章快讯文章归档关键词归档开发者手册归档开发者手册 Section 归档