thomas at biostat.washington.edu
Tue Apr 28 17:59:01 CEST 1998
On Tue, 28 Apr 1998, Bill Simpson wrote:
> I can get at data$x, data$y, data$z. I want to do an image plot. Ideally
> image (or a relative of image) would accept the vectors data$x, data$y,
> data$z as arguments. (After all, if you can do plot(x,y) on vectors x and
> y, why can't you do image(x,y,z) on vectors x, y, and z?) However it
> doesn't work like that.
The real reason is that it isn't written that way. There is a good
rationalisation, though. image() is a surface plot, not a 3-d
scatterplot, and so it is necessary that z is defined at every point on
the x,y grid (otherwise we don't know what color to plot). This is hard to
ensure when you have image(x,y,z) for vectors
> Anyway, can someone please explain how to get my data into a form
> acceptable to image? Thanks very much!
In fact, you don't need z to be a matrix. What you need is
The idea is that values of z are ordered in the same way as if it were
generated by outer(x,y,somefunction), which will generally be how it was
We probably shouldn't require x and y to be increasing -- we could still
assume z is ordered as if it were outer(x,y,somefunction).
Anyway, one thing you can do if you have the full x and y vectors is
If you have full-length x and y vectors that are not in the right order
you can use
which should probably be built in to image().
Uni of Washington
Seattle WA 98195-7232
r-help mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !) To: r-help-request at stat.math.ethz.ch
More information about the R-help