I am getting List of 8-bit unsigned int from a mic source for each sample rate which looks like this
[61, 251, 199, 251, 56, 252, 138, 252, 211, 252, 18, 253, 91, 253, 194, 253, 25, 254, 54, 254, 19, 254, 190, 253, 80, 253, 249, 252, 233, 252, 46, 253, 180, 253, 54, 254, 136, 254, 157, 254, 110, 254, 38, 254, 208, 253, 117, 253, 68, 253, 57, 253, 83, 253, 163, 253, 20, 254, 151, 254, 51, 255, 215, 255, 105, 0, 207, 0, 246, 0, 249, 0, 10, 1, 64, 1, 162, 1, 4, 2, 64, 2, 97, 2, 111, 2, 110, 2, 89, 2, 40, 2, 241, 1, 199, 1, 178, 1, 192, 1, 241, 1, 45, 2, 77, 2, 70, 2, 45, 2, 36, 2, 83, 2, 176, 2, 21, 3, 121, 3, 229, 3, 87, 4, 185, 4, 225, 4, 197, 4, 129, 4, 26, 4, 150, 3, 7, 3, 128, 2, 55, 2, 65, 2, 134, 2, 223, 2, 25, 3, 41, 3, 28, 3, 255, 2, 234, 2, 240, 2, 25, 3, 62, 3, 92, 3, 146, 3, 219, 3, 65, 4, 149, 4, 164, 4, 130, 4, 51, 4, 195, 3, 69, 3, 164, 2, 244, 1, 75, 1, 187, 0, 81, 0, 240, 255, 135, 255, 19, 255, 155, 254, 64, 254, 22, 254, 58, 254, 146, 254, 217, 254, 248, 254, 215, 254, 144, 254, 92, 254, 84, 254, 141, 254, 229, 254, 39, 255, 96, 255, 170, 255, 248, 255, 69, 0, 117, 0, 128, 0, 137, 0, 131, 0,
so how can I convert this into signed decimal value or someone can guide me to the right path
That depends on what the bytes mean.
Looking at the bytes, every other byte is either very low or very high. That suggests to me that the bytes are really little-endian signed 16-bit values.
In that case, you just need to view them as such. If we assume that the platform is little-endian (most are), you can just do:
List<int> list = ...;
Uint8List bytes = Uint8List.fromList(list); //
Int16List words = Int16List.sublistView(bytes);
Then the words list contains signed 16-bit numbers.
(If the list is already a Uint8List, you can skip the first step.)
If that's not what the bytes mean, you'll have to figure out what they do mean.
Dart int type provide a method to convert from signed to unsigned and from unsigned to signed.
For example:
int a = 16;
int b = 239;
print(a.toSigned(5).toString()); // Print -16
print(b.toSigned(5).toString()); // Print 15
the toSigned method parameter indicate the bit order of the sign bit.
You can get more information here: https://api.flutter.dev/flutter/dart-core/int/toSigned.html
A toUnsigned method exixts too: https://api.flutter.dev/flutter/dart-core/int/toUnsigned.html
Related
I am trying to implement a weighted sampler for a very imbalanced data set. There are 182 different classes. Here is an array of the bin counts per class:
array([69487, 5770, 5753, 138, 4308, 10, 1161, 29, 5611,
350, 7, 183, 218, 4, 3, 3872, 5, 950,
33, 3, 443, 16, 20, 330, 4353, 186, 19,
122, 546, 6, 44, 6, 3561, 2186, 3, 48,
8440, 338, 9, 610, 74, 236, 160, 449, 72,
6, 37, 1729, 2255, 1392, 12, 1, 3426, 513,
44, 3, 28, 12, 9, 27, 5, 75, 15,
3, 21, 549, 7, 25, 871, 240, 128, 28,
253, 62, 55, 12, 8, 57, 16, 99, 6,
5, 150, 7, 110, 8, 2, 1296, 70, 1927,
470, 1, 1, 511, 2, 620, 946, 36, 19,
21, 39, 6, 101, 15, 7, 1, 90, 29,
40, 14, 1, 4, 330, 1099, 1248, 1146, 7414,
934, 156, 80, 755, 3, 6, 6, 9, 21,
70, 219, 3, 3, 15, 15, 12, 69, 21,
15, 3, 101, 9, 9, 11, 6, 32, 6,
32, 4422, 16282, 12408, 2959, 3352, 146, 1329, 1300,
3795, 90, 1109, 120, 48, 23, 9, 1, 6,
2, 1, 11, 5, 27, 3, 7, 1, 3,
70, 1598, 254, 90, 20, 120, 380, 230, 180,
10, 10])
In some classes, instances are as low as 1. I am trying to implement a Weighted random sampler from torch for this dataset. However, as the class imbalance is so large, when I calculate weights using
count_occr = np.bincount(dataset.y)
lbl_weights = 1. / count_occr
weights = np.array(lbl_weights)
weights = torch.from_numpy(weights)
sampler = WeightedRandomSampler(weights.type('torch.DoubleTensor'), len(weights*2))
I get two error messages:
RuntimeWarning: divide by zero encountered in true_divide
and
RuntimeError: invalid multinomial distribution (encountering probability entry = infinity or NaN)
Does anyone have a work around for this ? I was considering multiplying the lbl_weights by some scalar however I am not sure if this is a viable option.
Building a pem file in Elixir requires several steps, including building an entity. In OTP 17, the following works:
{public, private} = :crypto.generate_key(:ecdh, :secp256k1)
ec_entity = {:ECPrivateKey,
1,
:binary.bin_to_list(private),
{:namedCurve, {1, 3, 132, 0, 10}},
{0, public}}
der_encoded = :public_key.der_encode(:ECPrivateKey, ec_entity)
pem = public_key.pem_encode([{:ECPrivateKey, der_encoded, :not_encrypted}])
But using OTP 18, the following error occurs:
{public, private} = :crypto.generate_key(:ecdh, :secp256k1)
ec_entity = {:ECPrivateKey,
1,
:binary.bin_to_list(private),
{:namedCurve, {1, 3, 132, 0, 10}},
{0, public}}
der_encoded = :public_key.der_encode(:ECPrivateKey, ec_entity)
** (MatchError) no match of right hand side value: {:error, {:asn1, :badarg}}
public_key.erl:253: :public_key.der_encode/2
What is the source of this error?
The source of the error is a change in the way that the public_key entity is constructed between OTP 17 and OTP 18. If we reverse the process, starting with a pem file, we can see the difference.
OTP 17:
iex(6)> pem = "-----BEGIN EC PRIVATE KEY-----\nMHQCAQEEIJniJF4vtTqE4wS5AkhmMZsHIbil0l3XfRButkw5IJYFoAcGBSuBBAAK\noUQDQgAEtxm+jijBB0JxZTceHnCHE0HpMXJp1ScVUZ5McvDUVsS/Dek8IdAsMOPz\nnnVALflZzXtH/wU9p2LrFdJeuXwL8g==\n-----END EC PRIVATE KEY-----\n\n"
"-----BEGIN EC PRIVATE KEY-----\nMHQCAQEEIJniJF4vtTqE4wS5AkhmMZsHIbil0l3XfRButkw5IJYFoAcGBSuBBAAK\noUQDQgAEtxm+jijBB0JxZTceHnCHE0HpMXJp1ScVUZ5McvDUVsS/Dek8IdAsMOPz\nnnVALflZzXtH/wU9p2LrFdJeuXwL8g==\n-----END EC PRIVATE KEY-----\n\n"
iex(7)> [{type, decoded, _}] = :public_key.pem_decode(pem)
[{:ECPrivateKey,
<<48, 116, 2, 1, 1, 4, 32, 153, 226, 36, 94, 47, 181, 58, 132, 227, 4, 185, 2, 72, 102, 49, 155, 7, 33, 184, 165, 210, 93, 215, 125, 16, 110, 182, 76, 57, 32, 150, 5, 160, 7, 6, 5, 43, 129, 4, 0, 10, ...>>,
:not_encrypted}]
iex(8)> :public_key.der_decode(type, decoded)
{:ECPrivateKey, 1,
[153, 226, 36, 94, 47, 181, 58, 132, 227, 4, 185, 2, 72, 102, 49, 155, 7, 33,
184, 165, 210, 93, 215, 125, 16, 110, 182, 76, 57, 32, 150, 5],
{:namedCurve, {1, 3, 132, 0, 10}},
{0,
<<4, 183, 25, 190, 142, 40, 193, 7, 66, 113, 101, 55, 30, 30, 112, 135, 19, 65, 233, 49, 114, 105, 213, 39, 21, 81, 158, 76, 114, 240, 212, 86, 196, 191, 13, 233, 60, 33, 208, 44, 48, 227, 243, 158, 117, ...>>}}
OTP 18:
iex(5)> [{type, decoded, _}] = :public_key.pem_decode(pem)
[{:ECPrivateKey,
<<48, 116, 2, 1, 1, 4, 32, 153, 226, 36, 94, 47, 181, 58, 132, 227, 4, 185, 2, 72, 102, 49, 155, 7, 33, 184, 165, 210, 93, 215, 125, 16, 110, 182, 76, 57, 32, 150, 5, 160, 7, 6, 5, 43, 129, 4, 0, 10, ...>>,
:not_encrypted}]
iex(6)> entity = :public_key.der_decode(type, decoded)
{:ECPrivateKey, 1,
<<153, 226, 36, 94, 47, 181, 58, 132, 227, 4, 185, 2, 72, 102, 49, 155, 7, 33, 184, 165, 210, 93, 215, 125, 16, 110, 182, 76, 57, 32, 150, 5>>,
{:namedCurve, {1, 3, 132, 0, 10}},
<<4, 183, 25, 190, 142, 40, 193, 7, 66, 113, 101, 55, 30, 30, 112, 135, 19, 65, 233, 49, 114, 105, 213, 39, 21, 81, 158, 76, 114, 240, 212, 86, 196, 191, 13, 233, 60, 33, 208, 44, 48, 227, 243, 158, 117, 64, ...>>}
The difference is in how the public and private keys are represented.
The signature of an ECPrivateKey Record is:
ECPrivateKey'{ version, privateKey, parameters, publicKey}
In Erlang 18, both values are represented at plain binaries, in 17, the private key is a list and the public key is part of a tuple, {0, binary}.
So in order to build the pem file correctly, the entity representation has to change.
{public, private} = :crypto.generate_key(:ecdh, :secp256k1)
entity = {:ECPrivateKey,
1,
private,
{:namedCurve, {1, 3, 132, 0, 10}},
public}
Using the new representation of the record will solve the problem.
I didn't really check why your version works on some versions, but I've got some code that works on all these erlang versions: 19.0, 18.2.1, 18.1, 18.0, 17.5, R16B03 (running on travis).
-include_lib("public_key/include/public_key.hrl").
genPEMKey() ->
CurveId = secp256k1,
{PubKey, PrivKey} = crypto:generate_key(ecdh, CurveId),
Key = #'ECPrivateKey'{version = 1,
privateKey = PrivKey,
parameters = {
namedCurve,
pubkey_cert_records:namedCurves(CurveId)},
publicKey = PubKey},
DERKey = public_key:der_encode('ECPrivateKey', Key),
public_key:pem_encode([{'ECPrivateKey', DERKey, not_encrypted}]).
This piece of code was based on the examples found in the OTP codebase:
https://github.com/erlang/otp/blob/master/lib/public_key/test/erl_make_certs.erl#L407
I'm trying to solve this issue in the most accurate way.
I have a UISlider, and a range between 0 to 300 (All primes).
How can I, using the UISlider, get an accurate access to each prime number in this range, while moving the slider? Any thoughts?
Store the first 0-300 prime numbers in an array
Bad way of doing it.
Set slider min to 0, and max to 300, and current to 0
When moving the slider check if the slider number exists in the array, if it does, update the label's text with the prime number
let primes = [2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, 37, 41, 43, 47, 53, 59, 61, 67, 71, 73, 79, 83, 89, 97, 101, 103, 107, 109, 113, 127, 131, 137, 139, 149, 151, 157, 163, 167, 173, 179, 181, 191, 193, 197, 199, 211, 223, 227, 229, 233, 239, 241, 251, 257, 263, 269, 271, 277, 281, 283, 293]
#IBOutlet weak var label: UILabel!
#IBAction func slider(sender: UISlider) {
let sliderNumber = Int(sender.value)
if primes.contains(sliderNumber) {
label.text = "\(sliderNumber)"
}
}
Good way to do it.
Set slider min to 0, and max to 61, and current to 0.
There are 62 prime numbers in the first 0-300.
When moving the slider, change the label text by indexing the primes array.
let primes = [2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, 37, 41, 43, 47, 53, 59, 61, 67, 71, 73, 79, 83, 89, 97, 101, 103, 107, 109, 113, 127, 131, 137, 139, 149, 151, 157, 163, 167, 173, 179, 181, 191, 193, 197, 199, 211, 223, 227, 229, 233, 239, 241, 251, 257, 263, 269, 271, 277, 281, 283, 293]
#IBOutlet weak var label: UILabel!
#IBAction func slider(sender: UISlider) {
let sliderNumber = Int(sender.value)
label.text = String(primes[sliderNumber])
}
Tested both the first and this second implementation, and the second one is much cleaner on the value transition.
I am trying to write a function to match ORB features. I am not using default matchers (bfmatcher, flann matcher) because i just want match speific features in image with features in other image.
I saw ORS descriptor its a binary array.
My query is how to match 2 features i.e how to find hamming distance between 2 descriptors ?
ORB descriptors:
descriptor1 =[34, 200, 96, 158, 75, 208, 158, 230, 151, 85, 192, 131, 40, 142, 54, 64, 75, 251, 147, 195, 78, 11, 62, 245, 49, 32, 154, 59, 21, 28, 52, 222]
descriptor2 =[128, 129, 2, 129, 196, 2, 168, 101, 60, 35, 83, 18, 12, 10, 104, 73, 122, 13, 2, 176, 114, 188, 1, 198, 12, 0, 154, 68, 5, 8, 177, 128]
Thanks.
ORB descriptors are just 32 byte uchar Mat's.
the bruteforce and flann matchers do some more work, than just comparing descriptors, but if that's all you want for now, it would be a straight norm:
Mat descriptor1, descriptor2;
double dist = norm( descriptor1, descriptor2, NORM_HAMMING);
// NORM_HAMMING2 or even NORM_L1 would make sense, too.
// dist is a double, but ofc. you'd only get integer values in this case.
I have a long list of group_ids like so:
#group_ids = #groups.map(&:group_id)
Rails.logger.info #group_ids
[182, 122, 181, 173, 167, 58, 13, 11, 180, 40, 71, 1, 29, 47, 142, 52, 174, 7, 168, 171, 156, 120, 79, 72, 54, 26, 65]
How can I take all those group_ids and output:
group_id:11 OR group_id:22 etc
Just do:
#group_ids * " OR "
(Ruby is great)
#group_ids = [182, 122, 181, 173, 167, 58, 13, 11, 180, 40, 71, 1, 29, 47, 142, 52, 174, 7, 168, 171, 156, 120, 79, 72, 54, 26, 65]
#group_ids.map{|id| "group_id:#{id}"}.join(" OR ")
#=> "group_id:182 OR group_id:122 OR group_id:181 OR group_id:173 OR group_id:167 OR group_id:58 OR group_id:13 OR group_id:11 OR group_id:180 OR group_id:40 OR group_id:71 OR group_id:1 OR group_id:29 OR group_id:47 OR group_id:142 OR group_id:52 OR group_id:174 OR group_id:7 OR group_id:168 OR group_id:171 OR group_id:156 OR group_id:120 OR group_id:79 OR group_id:72 OR group_id:54 OR group_id:26 OR group_id:65"