I'm trying to compute the cross-products of many 3x1 vector pairs as fast as possible. This
n = 10000
a = np.random.rand(n, 3)
b = np.random.rand(n, 3)
numpy.cross(a, b)
gives the correct answer, but motivated by this answer to a similar question, I thought that einsum
would get me somewhere. I found that both
eijk = np.zeros((3, 3, 3))
eijk[0, 1, 2] = eijk[1, 2, 0] = eijk[2, 0, 1] = 1
eijk[0, 2, 1] = eijk[2, 1, 0] = eijk[1, 0, 2] = -1
np.einsum('ijk,aj,ak->ai', eijk, a, b)
np.einsum('iak,ak->ai', np.einsum('ijk,aj->iak', eijk, a), b)
compute the cross product, but their performance is disappointing: Both methods perform much worse than np.cross
:
%timeit np.cross(a, b)
1000 loops, best of 3: 628 µs per loop
%timeit np.einsum('ijk,aj,ak->ai', eijk, a, b)
100 loops, best of 3: 9.02 ms per loop
%timeit np.einsum('iak,ak->ai', np.einsum('ijk,aj->iak', eijk, a), b)
100 loops, best of 3: 10.6 ms per loop
Any ideas of how to improve the einsum
s?
The count of multiply operation of einsum()
is more then cross()
, and in the newest NumPy version, cross()
doesn't create many temporary arrays. So einsum()
can't be faster than cross()
.
Here is the old code of cross:
x = a[1]*b[2] - a[2]*b[1]
y = a[2]*b[0] - a[0]*b[2]
z = a[0]*b[1] - a[1]*b[0]
Here is the new code of cross:
multiply(a1, b2, out=cp0)
tmp = array(a2 * b1)
cp0 -= tmp
multiply(a2, b0, out=cp1)
multiply(a0, b2, out=tmp)
cp1 -= tmp
multiply(a0, b1, out=cp2)
multiply(a1, b0, out=tmp)
cp2 -= tmp
To speedup it, you need cython or numba.
You can bring in matrix-multiplication using np.tensordot
to lose one of the dimensions at the first level and then use np.einsum
to lose the other dimension, like so -
np.einsum('aik,ak->ai',np.tensordot(a,eijk,axes=([1],[1])),b)
Alternatively, we can perform broadcasted elementwise multiplications between a
and b
using np.einsum
and then lose the two dimensions in one go with np.tensordot
, like so -
np.tensordot(np.einsum('aj,ak->ajk', a, b),eijk,axes=([1,2],[1,2]))
We could have performed the elementwise multiplications by introducing new axes too with something like a[...,None]*b[:,None]
, but it seems to slow it down.
Though, these show good improvement over the proposed np.einsum
only based approaches, but fail to beat np.cross
.
Runtime test -
In [26]: # Setup input arrays
...: n = 10000
...: a = np.random.rand(n, 3)
...: b = np.random.rand(n, 3)
...:
In [27]: # Time already posted approaches
...: %timeit np.cross(a, b)
...: %timeit np.einsum('ijk,aj,ak->ai', eijk, a, b)
...: %timeit np.einsum('iak,ak->ai', np.einsum('ijk,aj->iak', eijk, a), b)
...:
1000 loops, best of 3: 298 µs per loop
100 loops, best of 3: 5.29 ms per loop
100 loops, best of 3: 9 ms per loop
In [28]: %timeit np.einsum('aik,ak->ai',np.tensordot(a,eijk,axes=([1],[1])),b)
1000 loops, best of 3: 838 µs per loop
In [30]: %timeit np.tensordot(np.einsum('aj,ak->ajk',a,b),eijk,axes=([1,2],[1,2]))
1000 loops, best of 3: 882 µs per loop