Gaussian 09 Crack
Taichi Reilly
I am trying to figure out how to use a skewed gaussian to fit my data. In the process of searching for how to implement this in root, I came across the following resource that seems relevant, but I am unsure about one thing.
Hi, I would like to fit the derivative of a histogram (positive peak) using the skewed Gaussian. Since the distribution is not normalized, I think I should account for the amplitude for better description of the distribution. But I dont understand How to do it. Attached is the root file with the histogram and its derivative.
Jobtype Local Refinement. I always assumed it meant that there is a lower probability that a particle would be reassigned to a large distance/rotation away in any direction. So they penalize any decisions to assign a large shift. But in the end all particles contribute the same to the reconstruction.
From the guide:
As an antidote to overfitting, we can regularize the alignment problem by constructing a prior distribution over pose and shift, in order to penalize alignments that are too far away from the original alignments. The implementation uses an isotropic gaussian prior, centered at the current best alignment parameters. This can be done by activating the Use pose/shift gaussian prior during alignment parameter, and by specifying theStandard deviation of prior over rotation/shift parameters.
BTW, to control the search, just change the angle and shift standard deviations but leave the search extents as the default (3 * standard deviations). I use e.g. 7 and 4 for refinements already around 2-2.5 and slightly bigger ones for lower resolutions. Probably the particles are not 10+ pixels off in shift if the resolution is already reasonably good.
Hi there
Thanks so much for your reply I understand my misinterpretation now. I will tinker with this setting i think and see if i can get some improved results. We do expect the protein has a reasonable degree of independent motion, however less so than other similar proteins (our particle is a viral decoration and other proteins are known to occupy similar environments). We suspect the disorder is likely more related to symmetry mismatch, however i also suspect the motion is not helping with alignment so this hopefully will be helpful
thanks again,
James.
Hi there
I have not tried these options but i really appreciate the suggestion; we have kind of tabled this issue for now as it was not really working, but we intend to have another go in the future so i will give these a go
James.
HI, I usually sister? a gaussian blur filter layer and invert the layer and blur only the parts I want with a brush. In a couple of occasions, after inverting the layer, the brush does not work. Any explanation? Thanks. Here is a scree shot of a case in which the brush does nothing.
A few times, I had the same problem.
It happened with different kind of adjustment layers, and after inverting the layer.
For me , a (re) set fill to Black and White solved the problem.
The second Gaussian Blur entry in the History tab occurs when you move the radius slider on the Live Gaussian Blur Filter, which in this case is more probable than the OP adding another blur via Filters > Blur > Gaussian Blur. Which, admittedly, would have given the same readings in the History panel.
To save time I am currently using an automated AI to reply to some posts on this forum. If any of "my" posts are wrong or appear to be total b*ll*cks they are the ones generated by the AI. If correct they were probably mine. I apologise for any mistakes made by my AI - I'm sure it will improve with time.
This is not a bug, the live gaussian blur layer is applied as a clipped mask layer automatically, meaning you unmask the blue by moving the layer and only clip it back to the image. If you drag the blur over the image of the layer to get the vertical blue line prompt it will clip and mask the layer, giving the original blur effect!
if you look at my screen shot you can see that the blur layer is a dchild layer of the flower, which I had blurred 100% before inverting the layer. I have done this like a thousand times but occasionally it does not work.
When a live gaussian blur filter is automatically added as a clipping mask to, say, a rectangle, and I tick Preserve Alpha and set a value, nothing happens. If I drag the filter above the rectangle, the blur effect works and is applied to everything below it, but if I If I then group the rectangle with the blur layer above it as a possible solution, the blur effect is now applied to only the inside of the rectangle but not the edges, which remain sharply defined. I can add a destructive gaussian blur from the menu at the top and that works fine, but obviously isn't an ideal solution.
Same thing happens if I paint on a pixel layer with hard-edged strokes, and then add a live filter to soften them, so I'm wondering if it's a bug or me missing something obvious. Unfortunately, I'm still on v1.10.5 until I get a new Mac in the near future.
Special interest into procedural texture filter, edit alpha channel, RGB/16 and RGB/32 color formats, stacking, finding root causes for misbehaving files, finding creative solutions for unsolvable tasks, finding bugs in Apps.
Thanks. In trying to learn how to use Affinity I've watched a heap of videos, and I guess I've assumed from them it was important to tick that box, and it's only in this instance that it's caused a problem.
To make for a more convincing blur effect, isolate the foreground by moving it to a separate layer. Then, on the original layer, inpaint the foreground part so it gets replaced by textures and/or objects from the background. It doesn't need to look realistic because you're going to blur it anyway. Finally, apply your gaussian blur filter only to the background layer. That way, you'll avoid blending pixel information from the foreground beyond its original contour.
I have this problem all the time in Photoshop and Affinity photo. The problem is simply the Gaussian blur causes the background to bleed out from behind the layer ontop of it (and it'll do this even if you have it on the same layer and you're just using a selection). This isn't a bug; it's just how blurring works. For illustation, I have placed down a blue circle and created a selection around the circle.
So the trick is to copy the boy onto another layer, and then use Affinity Photo's "Inpainting" brush to remove the boy from the background layer. Then conduct the blur on the background layer. The inpainting does not need to be perfect; it's simply providing a different nearest neighbor for the Gaussian blur.
The CDO option -R is implemented only for data on a reduced Gaussian grid which covers the full globe (I will update the documentation). The longitudes in your file are from 0 to 259.94 deg.
A more general method to convert reduced Gaussian data to a regular Gaussian grid is:
cdo setridtype,regular infile outfileThis works for non global reduced Gaussian grids and also with GRIB2 data.
And with the conversion to NetCDF:
cdo -s -f nc4 -t ecmwf setridtype,regular concat.grb 52.runoff.ncCheers,
Uwe
Thank you so much Uwe! I didn't even think to look at the spatial extents. The data was supposed to be a full global dataset ... I'm speaking with ECMWF now to get the proper data sent. You're awesome! Thank you
Uwe (or anyone else),
Quick question:
It looks like we won't be able to get a 0-360 N-gridded (regular reduced gaussian grid) forecast from ECMWF ... but we may be able to get the forecast on an octahedral reduced gaussian grid (the ECMWF O-grid).
We had previously attempted to convert the O-grid to the F-grid (regular gaussian grid). The O-grid was 2560x1280 but with the conversion using "cdo -s -R -f nc4 -t ecmwf -copy ERAILand_gu1a_runoff6h_198610 test.nc", test.nc winds up on a grid that's 2576 x 1280 instead of the expected 2560 x 1280. I don't have a copy of that ERAILand_gu1a_runoff6h_198610 file to look at it more closely yet (I've requested it from the person who was testing the conversion for me) but was wondering if you knew if using the "-R" is the correct method or if we should use the "setgridtype,regular" instead? or is there some other trick that can go from an octahedral reduced gaussian grid to a regular gaussian grid?
Thanks again for you're help!
:)
Chris
In your code, why are you using matrix to array.vi? I don't understand this. Btw, the operations performed on matrices and arrays are different. Why filtering in frequency domain? Could you please share a link to the equations behind your code (or please explain)?
I am aware that image filtering can be performed both in spatial and frequency domain. I just thought that spatial domain filtering with Gaussian was more roboust (I have read somewhere that FFT has some degree of quality loss) and faster? Anyway, thank you very much for the explanation, I have never used Gaussian filter in frequency domain yet.
You're right - we should perform FFT for the kernel (as it shown above), but I was unable to get the code above running with FFT on the gaussian distribution. When image in frequency domain multiplied with bell-shaped function, then high frequencies gets truncated and image smoothed. It was just trick.
thnx alot for replying and helping me. i have some problems. actually i am doing my final year project. i m working on a theory named MULTISCALE RETINEX THEORY to enhance a coloured image. in that theory i have to convolv grayscale image with gaussian function. i know i can use gaussian filter that exists in l.v. but my problem is that i have to give three different values of sigma and calculate three gaussian function and then convolve the image with these func separately. so i dont know how to use gaussian filter for these three scales. those are.. 5,80 and 255. i showed u the vi with first scale. as Klemen told that image get smooth through gaussian and blurred through avrage filter. but the result of my that code in matlab is a blurred image. plz tell me
7fc3f7cf58