Why does my program return inaccurate result?
I wrote the well-known spectral-norm algorithm in Fortran after I initially wrote (and optimized) it in MATLAB. The speedup after naive conversion to Fortran is at least 18X, but the problem is that the output of the Fortran program is not accurate. The correct output should be 1.274224153
but my Fortran program outputs 1.273722712
, what am I doing wrong in Fortran?
program perf_spectralnorm
implicit none
integer, parameter :: n = 5500, dp = kind(0.d0)
real(dp) :: u(n) = 1, v(n), w(n), vBv, vv, res
integer :: i, j, nvec(n)
nvec = [(i, i=1,n)]
do i = 1,10
call Au(w, u) ! change w
call Atu(v, w) ! change v
call Au(w, v) ! change w
call Atu(u, w) ! change u
end do
vBv = dot_product(u, v)
vv = dot_product(v, v)
res = sqrt(vBv/vv)
print '(f12.9)', res
contains
elemental real(dp) function A(i, j)
integer, intent(in) :: i, j
A = 1.0_dp / ((i+j) * (i+j+1.0_dP)/2 + i + 1)
end
subroutine Au(w, u)
real(dp) :: w(:), u(:)
do i = 1,n
w(i) = dot_product(A(i-1,nvec-1) , u)
end do
end
subroutine Atu(v, w)
real(dp) :: v(:), w(:)
do i = 1,n
v(i) = dot_product(A(nvec-1,i-1) , w)
end do
end
end program perf_spectralnorm
My original implementation in MATLAB with correct output is as follows:
n = 5500;
fprintf("%.9fn", perf_spectralnorm(n))
function res = A(i,j)
res = 1 ./ ((i+j) .* (i+j+1)/2 + i + 1);
end
function w = Au(u,w)
n = length(u);
j = 1:n;
for i = 1:n
w(i) = dot( A(i-1,j-1), u );
end
end
function v = Atu(w,v)
n = length(w);
j = 1:n;
for i = 1:n
v(i) = dot( A(j-1,i-1), w );
end
end
function res = perf_spectralnorm(n)
u = ones(n,1);
v = zeros(n,1);
w = zeros(n,1);
for i = 1:10
w = Au(u,w);
v = Atu(w,v);
w = Au(v,w);
u = Atu(w,u);
end
vBv = dot(u,v);
vv = dot(v,v);
res = sqrt(vBv/vv);
end
matlab fortran subroutine
add a comment |
I wrote the well-known spectral-norm algorithm in Fortran after I initially wrote (and optimized) it in MATLAB. The speedup after naive conversion to Fortran is at least 18X, but the problem is that the output of the Fortran program is not accurate. The correct output should be 1.274224153
but my Fortran program outputs 1.273722712
, what am I doing wrong in Fortran?
program perf_spectralnorm
implicit none
integer, parameter :: n = 5500, dp = kind(0.d0)
real(dp) :: u(n) = 1, v(n), w(n), vBv, vv, res
integer :: i, j, nvec(n)
nvec = [(i, i=1,n)]
do i = 1,10
call Au(w, u) ! change w
call Atu(v, w) ! change v
call Au(w, v) ! change w
call Atu(u, w) ! change u
end do
vBv = dot_product(u, v)
vv = dot_product(v, v)
res = sqrt(vBv/vv)
print '(f12.9)', res
contains
elemental real(dp) function A(i, j)
integer, intent(in) :: i, j
A = 1.0_dp / ((i+j) * (i+j+1.0_dP)/2 + i + 1)
end
subroutine Au(w, u)
real(dp) :: w(:), u(:)
do i = 1,n
w(i) = dot_product(A(i-1,nvec-1) , u)
end do
end
subroutine Atu(v, w)
real(dp) :: v(:), w(:)
do i = 1,n
v(i) = dot_product(A(nvec-1,i-1) , w)
end do
end
end program perf_spectralnorm
My original implementation in MATLAB with correct output is as follows:
n = 5500;
fprintf("%.9fn", perf_spectralnorm(n))
function res = A(i,j)
res = 1 ./ ((i+j) .* (i+j+1)/2 + i + 1);
end
function w = Au(u,w)
n = length(u);
j = 1:n;
for i = 1:n
w(i) = dot( A(i-1,j-1), u );
end
end
function v = Atu(w,v)
n = length(w);
j = 1:n;
for i = 1:n
v(i) = dot( A(j-1,i-1), w );
end
end
function res = perf_spectralnorm(n)
u = ones(n,1);
v = zeros(n,1);
w = zeros(n,1);
for i = 1:10
w = Au(u,w);
v = Atu(w,v);
w = Au(v,w);
u = Atu(w,u);
end
vBv = dot(u,v);
vv = dot(v,v);
res = sqrt(vBv/vv);
end
matlab fortran subroutine
What Fortran compiler are you using, and have you turned on all debugging features? With gfortran and -fcheck=all -Wall, I get a runtime error "At line 8 of file a.f90 Fortran runtime error: Loop variable has been modified"
– evets
Nov 24 '18 at 20:07
1
Yep, subroutines Au and Atu USE variablei
via host association. You need to locally declarei
in these routines.
– evets
Nov 24 '18 at 20:10
@evets -- Thank you very much, you are right, I tend to use implicit variables (very bad habit) inside subroutines. In my case, the value ofI
in the main program propagated its value to the called subroutines. Please go a head and write an answer.
– AboAmmar
Nov 24 '18 at 20:18
add a comment |
I wrote the well-known spectral-norm algorithm in Fortran after I initially wrote (and optimized) it in MATLAB. The speedup after naive conversion to Fortran is at least 18X, but the problem is that the output of the Fortran program is not accurate. The correct output should be 1.274224153
but my Fortran program outputs 1.273722712
, what am I doing wrong in Fortran?
program perf_spectralnorm
implicit none
integer, parameter :: n = 5500, dp = kind(0.d0)
real(dp) :: u(n) = 1, v(n), w(n), vBv, vv, res
integer :: i, j, nvec(n)
nvec = [(i, i=1,n)]
do i = 1,10
call Au(w, u) ! change w
call Atu(v, w) ! change v
call Au(w, v) ! change w
call Atu(u, w) ! change u
end do
vBv = dot_product(u, v)
vv = dot_product(v, v)
res = sqrt(vBv/vv)
print '(f12.9)', res
contains
elemental real(dp) function A(i, j)
integer, intent(in) :: i, j
A = 1.0_dp / ((i+j) * (i+j+1.0_dP)/2 + i + 1)
end
subroutine Au(w, u)
real(dp) :: w(:), u(:)
do i = 1,n
w(i) = dot_product(A(i-1,nvec-1) , u)
end do
end
subroutine Atu(v, w)
real(dp) :: v(:), w(:)
do i = 1,n
v(i) = dot_product(A(nvec-1,i-1) , w)
end do
end
end program perf_spectralnorm
My original implementation in MATLAB with correct output is as follows:
n = 5500;
fprintf("%.9fn", perf_spectralnorm(n))
function res = A(i,j)
res = 1 ./ ((i+j) .* (i+j+1)/2 + i + 1);
end
function w = Au(u,w)
n = length(u);
j = 1:n;
for i = 1:n
w(i) = dot( A(i-1,j-1), u );
end
end
function v = Atu(w,v)
n = length(w);
j = 1:n;
for i = 1:n
v(i) = dot( A(j-1,i-1), w );
end
end
function res = perf_spectralnorm(n)
u = ones(n,1);
v = zeros(n,1);
w = zeros(n,1);
for i = 1:10
w = Au(u,w);
v = Atu(w,v);
w = Au(v,w);
u = Atu(w,u);
end
vBv = dot(u,v);
vv = dot(v,v);
res = sqrt(vBv/vv);
end
matlab fortran subroutine
I wrote the well-known spectral-norm algorithm in Fortran after I initially wrote (and optimized) it in MATLAB. The speedup after naive conversion to Fortran is at least 18X, but the problem is that the output of the Fortran program is not accurate. The correct output should be 1.274224153
but my Fortran program outputs 1.273722712
, what am I doing wrong in Fortran?
program perf_spectralnorm
implicit none
integer, parameter :: n = 5500, dp = kind(0.d0)
real(dp) :: u(n) = 1, v(n), w(n), vBv, vv, res
integer :: i, j, nvec(n)
nvec = [(i, i=1,n)]
do i = 1,10
call Au(w, u) ! change w
call Atu(v, w) ! change v
call Au(w, v) ! change w
call Atu(u, w) ! change u
end do
vBv = dot_product(u, v)
vv = dot_product(v, v)
res = sqrt(vBv/vv)
print '(f12.9)', res
contains
elemental real(dp) function A(i, j)
integer, intent(in) :: i, j
A = 1.0_dp / ((i+j) * (i+j+1.0_dP)/2 + i + 1)
end
subroutine Au(w, u)
real(dp) :: w(:), u(:)
do i = 1,n
w(i) = dot_product(A(i-1,nvec-1) , u)
end do
end
subroutine Atu(v, w)
real(dp) :: v(:), w(:)
do i = 1,n
v(i) = dot_product(A(nvec-1,i-1) , w)
end do
end
end program perf_spectralnorm
My original implementation in MATLAB with correct output is as follows:
n = 5500;
fprintf("%.9fn", perf_spectralnorm(n))
function res = A(i,j)
res = 1 ./ ((i+j) .* (i+j+1)/2 + i + 1);
end
function w = Au(u,w)
n = length(u);
j = 1:n;
for i = 1:n
w(i) = dot( A(i-1,j-1), u );
end
end
function v = Atu(w,v)
n = length(w);
j = 1:n;
for i = 1:n
v(i) = dot( A(j-1,i-1), w );
end
end
function res = perf_spectralnorm(n)
u = ones(n,1);
v = zeros(n,1);
w = zeros(n,1);
for i = 1:10
w = Au(u,w);
v = Atu(w,v);
w = Au(v,w);
u = Atu(w,u);
end
vBv = dot(u,v);
vv = dot(v,v);
res = sqrt(vBv/vv);
end
matlab fortran subroutine
matlab fortran subroutine
edited Nov 24 '18 at 19:51
AboAmmar
asked Nov 24 '18 at 19:17
AboAmmarAboAmmar
484312
484312
What Fortran compiler are you using, and have you turned on all debugging features? With gfortran and -fcheck=all -Wall, I get a runtime error "At line 8 of file a.f90 Fortran runtime error: Loop variable has been modified"
– evets
Nov 24 '18 at 20:07
1
Yep, subroutines Au and Atu USE variablei
via host association. You need to locally declarei
in these routines.
– evets
Nov 24 '18 at 20:10
@evets -- Thank you very much, you are right, I tend to use implicit variables (very bad habit) inside subroutines. In my case, the value ofI
in the main program propagated its value to the called subroutines. Please go a head and write an answer.
– AboAmmar
Nov 24 '18 at 20:18
add a comment |
What Fortran compiler are you using, and have you turned on all debugging features? With gfortran and -fcheck=all -Wall, I get a runtime error "At line 8 of file a.f90 Fortran runtime error: Loop variable has been modified"
– evets
Nov 24 '18 at 20:07
1
Yep, subroutines Au and Atu USE variablei
via host association. You need to locally declarei
in these routines.
– evets
Nov 24 '18 at 20:10
@evets -- Thank you very much, you are right, I tend to use implicit variables (very bad habit) inside subroutines. In my case, the value ofI
in the main program propagated its value to the called subroutines. Please go a head and write an answer.
– AboAmmar
Nov 24 '18 at 20:18
What Fortran compiler are you using, and have you turned on all debugging features? With gfortran and -fcheck=all -Wall, I get a runtime error "At line 8 of file a.f90 Fortran runtime error: Loop variable has been modified"
– evets
Nov 24 '18 at 20:07
What Fortran compiler are you using, and have you turned on all debugging features? With gfortran and -fcheck=all -Wall, I get a runtime error "At line 8 of file a.f90 Fortran runtime error: Loop variable has been modified"
– evets
Nov 24 '18 at 20:07
1
1
Yep, subroutines Au and Atu USE variable
i
via host association. You need to locally declare i
in these routines.– evets
Nov 24 '18 at 20:10
Yep, subroutines Au and Atu USE variable
i
via host association. You need to locally declare i
in these routines.– evets
Nov 24 '18 at 20:10
@evets -- Thank you very much, you are right, I tend to use implicit variables (very bad habit) inside subroutines. In my case, the value of
I
in the main program propagated its value to the called subroutines. Please go a head and write an answer.– AboAmmar
Nov 24 '18 at 20:18
@evets -- Thank you very much, you are right, I tend to use implicit variables (very bad habit) inside subroutines. In my case, the value of
I
in the main program propagated its value to the called subroutines. Please go a head and write an answer.– AboAmmar
Nov 24 '18 at 20:18
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Subroutines Au
and Atu
use a variable i
for the do-loop through host association. This modified the do-loop variable i
in main program, which is invalid. To solve the issue, you need to declare i
as a local variable in Au
and Atu
. For example,
subroutine Au(w, u)
real(dp), intent(out) :: w(:)
real(dp), intent(in) :: u(:)
integer i
do i = 1, n
w(i) = dot_product(A(nvec-1,i-1), u)
end do
end
Note, I've taken the liberty to also include the INTENT
of the dummy arguments.
I've done some tests and, by makingnvec
aparameter
, I got a 33% speed-up withgfortran -Ofast
comparing with the presented solution. I have 3.39sec with my not-that-impressive i5 - 1.6GHz. The same result is obtained by using only array implied-do constructors instead ofdo
loops andnvec
.
– Rodrigo Rodrigues
Nov 25 '18 at 0:26
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53461567%2fwhy-does-my-program-return-inaccurate-result%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Subroutines Au
and Atu
use a variable i
for the do-loop through host association. This modified the do-loop variable i
in main program, which is invalid. To solve the issue, you need to declare i
as a local variable in Au
and Atu
. For example,
subroutine Au(w, u)
real(dp), intent(out) :: w(:)
real(dp), intent(in) :: u(:)
integer i
do i = 1, n
w(i) = dot_product(A(nvec-1,i-1), u)
end do
end
Note, I've taken the liberty to also include the INTENT
of the dummy arguments.
I've done some tests and, by makingnvec
aparameter
, I got a 33% speed-up withgfortran -Ofast
comparing with the presented solution. I have 3.39sec with my not-that-impressive i5 - 1.6GHz. The same result is obtained by using only array implied-do constructors instead ofdo
loops andnvec
.
– Rodrigo Rodrigues
Nov 25 '18 at 0:26
add a comment |
Subroutines Au
and Atu
use a variable i
for the do-loop through host association. This modified the do-loop variable i
in main program, which is invalid. To solve the issue, you need to declare i
as a local variable in Au
and Atu
. For example,
subroutine Au(w, u)
real(dp), intent(out) :: w(:)
real(dp), intent(in) :: u(:)
integer i
do i = 1, n
w(i) = dot_product(A(nvec-1,i-1), u)
end do
end
Note, I've taken the liberty to also include the INTENT
of the dummy arguments.
I've done some tests and, by makingnvec
aparameter
, I got a 33% speed-up withgfortran -Ofast
comparing with the presented solution. I have 3.39sec with my not-that-impressive i5 - 1.6GHz. The same result is obtained by using only array implied-do constructors instead ofdo
loops andnvec
.
– Rodrigo Rodrigues
Nov 25 '18 at 0:26
add a comment |
Subroutines Au
and Atu
use a variable i
for the do-loop through host association. This modified the do-loop variable i
in main program, which is invalid. To solve the issue, you need to declare i
as a local variable in Au
and Atu
. For example,
subroutine Au(w, u)
real(dp), intent(out) :: w(:)
real(dp), intent(in) :: u(:)
integer i
do i = 1, n
w(i) = dot_product(A(nvec-1,i-1), u)
end do
end
Note, I've taken the liberty to also include the INTENT
of the dummy arguments.
Subroutines Au
and Atu
use a variable i
for the do-loop through host association. This modified the do-loop variable i
in main program, which is invalid. To solve the issue, you need to declare i
as a local variable in Au
and Atu
. For example,
subroutine Au(w, u)
real(dp), intent(out) :: w(:)
real(dp), intent(in) :: u(:)
integer i
do i = 1, n
w(i) = dot_product(A(nvec-1,i-1), u)
end do
end
Note, I've taken the liberty to also include the INTENT
of the dummy arguments.
answered Nov 24 '18 at 20:38
evetsevets
31215
31215
I've done some tests and, by makingnvec
aparameter
, I got a 33% speed-up withgfortran -Ofast
comparing with the presented solution. I have 3.39sec with my not-that-impressive i5 - 1.6GHz. The same result is obtained by using only array implied-do constructors instead ofdo
loops andnvec
.
– Rodrigo Rodrigues
Nov 25 '18 at 0:26
add a comment |
I've done some tests and, by makingnvec
aparameter
, I got a 33% speed-up withgfortran -Ofast
comparing with the presented solution. I have 3.39sec with my not-that-impressive i5 - 1.6GHz. The same result is obtained by using only array implied-do constructors instead ofdo
loops andnvec
.
– Rodrigo Rodrigues
Nov 25 '18 at 0:26
I've done some tests and, by making
nvec
a parameter
, I got a 33% speed-up with gfortran -Ofast
comparing with the presented solution. I have 3.39sec with my not-that-impressive i5 - 1.6GHz. The same result is obtained by using only array implied-do constructors instead of do
loops and nvec
.– Rodrigo Rodrigues
Nov 25 '18 at 0:26
I've done some tests and, by making
nvec
a parameter
, I got a 33% speed-up with gfortran -Ofast
comparing with the presented solution. I have 3.39sec with my not-that-impressive i5 - 1.6GHz. The same result is obtained by using only array implied-do constructors instead of do
loops and nvec
.– Rodrigo Rodrigues
Nov 25 '18 at 0:26
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53461567%2fwhy-does-my-program-return-inaccurate-result%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
What Fortran compiler are you using, and have you turned on all debugging features? With gfortran and -fcheck=all -Wall, I get a runtime error "At line 8 of file a.f90 Fortran runtime error: Loop variable has been modified"
– evets
Nov 24 '18 at 20:07
1
Yep, subroutines Au and Atu USE variable
i
via host association. You need to locally declarei
in these routines.– evets
Nov 24 '18 at 20:10
@evets -- Thank you very much, you are right, I tend to use implicit variables (very bad habit) inside subroutines. In my case, the value of
I
in the main program propagated its value to the called subroutines. Please go a head and write an answer.– AboAmmar
Nov 24 '18 at 20:18