Note that your list of sourceNodes and targetNodes only includes three unique entries: 0 (which I assume is ground), N001, and N002 (the two nodes on either side of L1, correct?)
netlist = {
'R1 N001 0 R';
'R2 N002 N001 R';
'R3 0 N002 R';
'C1 N002 N001 C';
'C2 N001 0 C';
'C3 N002 0 C';
'L1 N002 N001 L';
'L2 0 N001 L';
'L3 0 N002 L'
};
elements = {};
sourceNodes = {};
targetNodes = {};
labels = {};
for i = 1:length(netlist)
parts = strsplit(netlist{i});
elements{end+1} = parts{1};
sourceNodes{end+1} = parts{2};
targetNodes{end+1} = parts{3};
labels{end+1} = [parts{4} ' - ' parts{1}];
end
None of your resistors, capacitors, or loads (I assume that's what L1 through L3 are?) are nodes. Shouldn't they be? Or should the intermediate nodes between those components be nodes as well?
Continuing on with your code:
edgeTable = table(sourceNodes', targetNodes', labels', 'VariableNames', {'EndNodes', 'EndNodes2', 'Label'})
G = digraph(edgeTable.EndNodes, edgeTable.EndNodes2);
The next line of your code is problematic. I've added one additional line before it so I can show you why it's problematic.
G.Edges % Show the edges table before
G.Edges.Label = edgeTable.Label;
G.Edges % Show the edges table after
The second row in the G.Edges table before doesn't match the second row in edgeTable. You assume that the rows in the G.Edges table are in the same order as they appear in edgeTable. That is not necessarily the case; digraph reserves the right to reorder the Edges table.
Instead of disassembling edgeTable and adding the labels afterwards, why not build edgeTable in such a way that it's a valid value for the EdgeTable input of the digraph function? Then even if digraph needs to reorder the rows of the edges table, the Label variable is reordered so it remain synchronized with the EndNodes variable.
edgeTable = table([sourceNodes', targetNodes'], labels', 'VariableNames', {'EndNodes', 'Label'})
G2 = digraph(edgeTable);
G2.Edges
If we plot G2 it still doesn't look like your original plot, but the labels are correct.
plot(G2, 'EdgeLabel', G2.Edges.Label)
If you pictured that 0 as being much wider (the ground is not actually a single point), this actually does topologically match the original picture you showed.
Making each of the components an individual node, splitting the 0 ground node into one node for each component, using the layout function (to display it as a 'layered' graph), and/or explicitly specifying the 'XData' and 'YData' coordinates in the plot call would probably make it look closer to your original picture.
