The Samovar


Fast fractals with Python and numpy

This will be of little interest to people who regularly read my blog, but might be of some interest to people who find their way here by the power of Google.

The standard way to compute fractals like the Mandelbrot set using Python and numpy is to use vectorisation and do the operations on a whole set of points. The problem is that this is slower than it needs to be because you keep doing computations on points that have already escaped. This can be avoided though, and the version below is about 3x faster than the standard way of doing it with numpy.

The trick is to create a new array at each iteration that stores only the points which haven’t yet escaped. The slight complication is that if you do this you need to keep track of the x, y coordinates of each of the points as well as the values of the iterate z. The same trick can be applied to many types of fractals and makes Python and numpy almost as good as C++ for mathematical exploration of fractals.

I’ve included the code below, both with and without explanatory comments. This 400×400 image below using 100 iterations took 1.1s to compute on my 1.8GHz laptop:

mandel

Uncommented version:

def mandel(n, m, itermax, xmin, xmax, ymin, ymax):
    ix, iy = mgrid[0:n, 0:m]
    x = linspace(xmin, xmax, n)[ix]
    y = linspace(ymin, ymax, m)[iy]
    c = x+complex(0,1)*y
    del x, y
    img = zeros(c.shape, dtype=int)
    ix.shape = n*m
    iy.shape = n*m
    c.shape = n*m
    z = copy(c)
    for i in xrange(itermax):
        if not len(z): break
        multiply(z, z, z)
        add(z, c, z)
        rem = abs(z)>2.0
        img[ix[rem], iy[rem]] = i+1
        rem = -rem
        z = z[rem]
        ix, iy = ix[rem], iy[rem]
        c = c[rem]
    return img

Commented version:

from numpy import *

def mandel(n, m, itermax, xmin, xmax, ymin, ymax):
    '''
    Fast mandelbrot computation using numpy.

    (n, m) are the output image dimensions
    itermax is the maximum number of iterations to do
    xmin, xmax, ymin, ymax specify the region of the
    set to compute.
    '''
    # The point of ix and iy is that they are 2D arrays
    # giving the x-coord and y-coord at each point in
    # the array. The reason for doing this will become
    # clear below...
    ix, iy = mgrid[0:n, 0:m]
    # Now x and y are the x-values and y-values at each
    # point in the array, linspace(start, end, n)
    # is an array of n linearly spaced points between
    # start and end, and we then index this array using
    # numpy fancy indexing. If A is an array and I is
    # an array of indices, then A[I] has the same shape
    # as I and at each place i in I has the value A[i].
    x = linspace(xmin, xmax, n)[ix]
    y = linspace(ymin, ymax, m)[iy]
    # c is the complex number with the given x, y coords
    c = x+complex(0,1)*y
    del x, y # save a bit of memory, we only need z
    # the output image coloured according to the number
    # of iterations it takes to get to the boundary
    # abs(z)>2
    img = zeros(c.shape, dtype=int)
    # Here is where the improvement over the standard
    # algorithm for drawing fractals in numpy comes in.
    # We flatten all the arrays ix, iy and c. This
    # flattening doesn't use any more memory because
    # we are just changing the shape of the array, the
    # data in memory stays the same. It also affects
    # each array in the same way, so that index i in
    # array c has x, y coords ix[i], iy[i]. The way the
    # algorithm works is that whenever abs(z)>2 we
    # remove the corresponding index from each of the
    # arrays ix, iy and c. Since we do the same thing
    # to each array, the correspondence between c and
    # the x, y coords stored in ix and iy is kept.
    ix.shape = n*m
    iy.shape = n*m
    c.shape = n*m
    # we iterate z->z^2+c with z starting at 0, but the
    # first iteration makes z=c so we just start there.
    # We need to copy c because otherwise the operation
    # z->z^2 will send c->c^2.
    z = copy(c)
    for i in xrange(itermax):
        if not len(z): break # all points have escaped
        # equivalent to z = z*z+c but quicker and uses
        # less memory
        multiply(z, z, z)
        add(z, c, z)
        # these are the points that have escaped
        rem = abs(z)>2.0
        # colour them with the iteration number, we
        # add one so that points which haven't
        # escaped have 0 as their iteration number,
        # this is why we keep the arrays ix and iy
        # because we need to know which point in img
        # to colour
        img[ix[rem], iy[rem]] = i+1
        # -rem is the array of points which haven't
        # escaped, in numpy -A for a boolean array A
        # is the NOT operation.
        rem = -rem
        # So we select out the points in
        # z, ix, iy and c which are still to be
        # iterated on in the next step
        z = z[rem]
        ix, iy = ix[rem], iy[rem]
        c = c[rem]
    return img

if __name__=='__main__':
    from pylab import *
    import time
    start = time.time()
    I = mandel(400, 400, 100, -2, .5, -1.25, 1.25)
    print 'Time taken:', time.time()-start
    I[I==0] = 101
    img = imshow(I.T, origin='lower left')
    img.write_png('mandel.png', noscale=True)
    show()


7 Comments so far
Leave a comment

You are a GOD

Comment by Al Juarîsmi

I’m wondering about

# less memory
58 multiply(z, z, z)
59 add(z, c, z)

Is this really better than

z[:] = z[:]*z[:] + c[:]

As I would expect multiply does a loop and add does a loop, while the vectorized assign does a loop to compute a temporary array, then a loop to assign to the result.

Comment by benny

Hey benny, I did some timings on this with IPython. For arrays of length 10000 I got that my method takes around 40 microseconds per loop, whereas yours takes 50 microseconds. For arrays of length 1000000 mine takes around 8ms and yours around 20ms – so it’s a significant saving especially for larger arrays.

Also, your analysis is not quite right. First of all, your code z[:]=z[:]*z[:]+c[:] in fact does exactly the same as z[:]=z*z+c. This translates into something like:

temp1 = empty_like(z)
multiply(z, z, temp1)
temp2 = empty_like(z)
add(temp1, c, temp2)
z[:] = temp2

In other words, your version creates two intermediate temporary variables, and does one extra loop and one extra copy. It also requires three Python function calls instead of just two in my case.

Comment by Dan | thesamovar

You rule man. Thanks a bunch!

Comment by Blaine

its not working! :*( it keeps saying there is an unexpected indent on lines 19 through 22. im new to python, sooo yeah…

Comment by Anonymous

In Python the white space is important, so if you don’t copy the program exactly it might cause problems. Try using the ‘copy to clipboard’ button at the top right of the code window.

Comment by Dan | thesamovar

UPDATE: Using numexpr, it’s possible to get this running even faster. The trick is to combine several iterations into one, so each step you compute z maps to (z**2+c)**2+c instead of z maps to z**2+c. Using 8 iterations per step seems to be optimal and gives a speed up of 4.5x over the version above. Here’s the code:

from numpy import *
import numexpr as ne

def mandel(n, m, itermax, xmin, xmax, ymin, ymax):
    ix, iy = mgrid[0:n, 0:m]
    x = linspace(xmin, xmax, n)[ix]
    y = linspace(ymin, ymax, m)[iy]
    c = x+complex(0,1)*y
    del x, y # save a bit of memory, we only need z
    img = zeros(c.shape, dtype=int)
    ix.shape = n*m
    iy.shape = n*m
    c.shape = n*m
    z = copy(c)
    for i in xrange(itermax):
        if not len(z): break # all points have escaped
        multiply(z, z, z)
        add(z, c, z)
        rem = abs(z)>2.0
        img[ix[rem], iy[rem]] = i+1
        rem = -rem
        z = z[rem]
        ix, iy = ix[rem], iy[rem]
        c = c[rem]
    return img

def nemandel(n, m, itermax, xmin, xmax, ymin, ymax,
             depth=1):
    expr = 'z**2+c'
    for _ in xrange(depth-1):
        expr = '({expr})**2+c'.format(expr=expr)
    itermax = itermax/depth
    print 'Expression used:', expr
    ix, iy = mgrid[0:n, 0:m]
    x = linspace(xmin, xmax, n)[ix]
    y = linspace(ymin, ymax, m)[iy]
    c = x+complex(0,1)*y
    del x, y # save a bit of memory, we only need z
    img = zeros(c.shape, dtype=int)
    ix.shape = n*m
    iy.shape = n*m
    c.shape = n*m
    z = copy(c)
    for i in xrange(itermax):
        if not len(z): break # all points have escaped
        z = ne.evaluate(expr)
        rem = abs(z)>2.0
        img[ix[rem], iy[rem]] = i+1
        rem = -rem
        z = z[rem]
        ix, iy = ix[rem], iy[rem]
        c = c[rem]
    img[img==0] = itermax+1
    return img

if __name__=='__main__':
    from pylab import *
    import time
    doplot = True
    args = (1000, 1000, 100, -2, .5, -1.25, 1.25)
    start = time.time()
    I = mandel(*args)
    print 'Mandel time taken:', time.time()-start
    start = time.time()
    I2 = nemandel(*args)
    print 'Nemandel time taken:', time.time()-start
    start = time.time()
    I3 = nemandel(*args, depth=2)
    print 'Nemandel 2 time taken:', time.time()-start
    start = time.time()
    I4 = nemandel(*args, depth=3)
    print 'Nemandel 3 time taken:', time.time()-start
    for d in xrange(4, 9):
        start = time.time()
        I4 = nemandel(*args, depth=d)
        print 'Nemandel', d, 'time taken:', time.time()-start

    if doplot:
        subplot(221)
        img = imshow(I.T, origin='lower left')
        subplot(222)
        img = imshow(I2.T, origin='lower left')
        subplot(223)
        img = imshow(I3.T, origin='lower left')
        subplot(224)
        img = imshow(I4.T, origin='lower left')
        show()
Comment by Dan | thesamovar




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s



Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.