All,
I have numerous nested dictionaries that I've been building and updating on the fly which can be combination of variables and lambdas functions. My initial inputs are constants and incremental data varies but are mostly derivatives using lambdas and function references.
I keep running a type issues as I pass constants and lambdas into my functions and my functions break. The solution at present is to simply wrap all my constants and data as simple f(x)s but I'd like to handle that inside my functions instead of wrapping everything.
In my example below, I'd like to add a conditional or something to QAQC the variable so I can handle it inside each function.
.inv.1.startDate: 2022.10.10 is a constant then my function breaks at sd: d[`startDate][] (which make sense as its not a function) but will work if .inv.1.startDate: {2022.10.10}
I tried a conditional below but it fails as not all dictionary values are f(x) either.
sd: ?[(type d[`startDate]=100h;d[`startDate][];d[`startDate])] ; which doesn't seem to work either.
Example of incremental references to render an array of series of dates
.inv.1.startDate:2022.10.10; //<---- works as f(x) but not when a constant
.inv.1.duration: 155;
.inv.1.iDate:{dateArray[.inv;1]};
.inv.2.startDate: {last (.inv.1.iDate[])};
.inv.2.duration: 250;
.inv.2.iDate:{dateArray[.inv;2]};
.inv.3.startDate: {last (.inv.2.iDate[])};
.inv.3.duration: 95;
.inv.3.iDate:{dateArray[.inv;3]};
dateArray:{[seg;segNum];
d: seg[`$string segNum];
sd: d[`startDate][]; //this can be a constant or a f(x) depending on when its called)
days: d[`duration]; // this could be a constant or a f(x) as well
result: sd+ til days
};
//attempt to emply a conditional but fails due to data type
sd: ?[(type d[`startDate]=100h;d[`startDate][];d[`startDate])] ;
FWIW- this is an expansion upon
kdb - nested functions within nested dictionaries
It looks like you are using ? in cases where $ is more applicable https://code.kx.com/q/ref/cond/
Also there is an order of evaluation issue with:
type d[`startDate]=100h
https://code.kx.com/q4m3/4_Operators/#412-left-of-right-evaluation
What you want is:
(type d[`startDate])=100h
Or more cleanly:
100h = type d[`startDate]
An alternative is to wrap your processing in a try-catch:
sd:{#[x;`;x]}d`startDate;
but as I mentioned in an earlier comment, personally I think it would be cleaner to have the constants in a lambda, e.g. .inv.1.startDate:{2022.10.10}
Related
i see that fix documentation says:
http://www.minizinc.org/doc-lib/doc-builtins-reflect.html#Ifunction-dd-T-cl-fix-po-var-opt-dd-T-cl-x-pc
function array [$U] of $T: fix(array [$U] of var opt $T: x)
Check if the value of every element of the array x is fixedat this point in evaluation. If all are fixed, return an array of their values, otherwise abort.
I am thinking it can be used to coerce a var to a par.
Here is the code.
array [1..num] of var int: value ;
%% generate random numbers from 0..num-1, this should fix the value of the var "value" or so i think
constraint forall(i in index_set(value))(let {int:temp_value=discrete_distribution([1|i in index_set(value)]); } in value[i]=trace(show(temp_value)++"\n", temp_value));
%%% this i was expecting to work, as "value" elements are fixed above
array [1..num] of int:value__ =[ trace(show(fix(value[i])), fix(value[i])) | i in index_set(value)] ;
But i get:
MiniZinc: evaluation error:
with i = 1
in call 'trace'
in call 'fix'
expression is not fixed
My questions are:
1) I think i should expect this error as minizinc is not sequential execution language?
2) Examples of fix in user guide is only where output statement is used. Is it the only place to use fix?
3) How would i coerce a var to a par?
By the way I am trying this var to par conversion because i am having problem with array generator expression. Here is the code
int:num__=200;
int:seed=134;
int: two_m=2097184;
%% prepare weights for generating numbers form 1..(two_m div 64), basically same weight
array [1..(two_m div 64)] of int: value_6_wt= [seed+1 | i in 1..(two_m div 64)] ;
%% generate numbers. this dose not work gives out
%% in variable declaration for 'value6'
%% parameter value out of range
array [1..num__] of int : value6 = [ discrete_distribution(value_6_wt) | j in 1..num__];
In the MiniZinc language the difference between a parameter and a variable is only the fact that a parameter must have a value at compile time. Within the compiler we turn as many variables into parameters as we can. This saves the solver from having to do some work. When we know that a variable has been turned into a parameter, then we can use the fix function to convince the type system that we really can use this variable as a parameter and see its value.
The problem here however is that fix is defined to abort when the variable is not fixed to one value. If no testing is done, this requires some (magic/)knowledge about the compilation process. In your case it seems that the second array is evaluated before the optimisation stage, in which all aliasing is resolved. This is the reason why it does not work. (This is indeed one of the things that is a consequence of a declarative language)
Although fix might only be used in the output statements in the examples (where it's guaranteed to work), it is used in many locations in the MiniZinc libraries. If we for example look at the library that is used for MIP solvers, there are many constraints that can be encoded more efficiently if one of the arguments is a parameter. Therefore, you will often see that the a constraint in this library first tests its arguments with is_fixed, and then use a better encoding if this returns true.
The output statement and when is_fixed returns true will both give the guarantee that a variable is fixed and ensure that the compilation doesn't abort. There is no other way to coerce a variable to a parameter, but unless you are dealing with dependant predicate definitions, you can just trust the MiniZinc compiler to ensure that the resulting FlatZinc will contain a parameter instead of a variable.
I am writing a signal processing program using matlab. I know there are two types of float-pointing variables, single and double. Considering the memory usage, I want my code to work with only single type variable when the system's memory is not large, while it can also be adapted to work with double type variables when necessary, without significant modification (simple and light modification before running is OK, i.e., I don't need runtime-check technique). I know this can be done by macro in C and by template in C++. I don't find practical techniques which can do this in matlab. Do you have any experience with this?
I have a simple idea that I define a global string containing "single" or "double", then I pass this string to any memory allocation method called in my code to indicate what type I need. I think this can work, I just want to know which technique you guys use and is widely accepted.
I cannot see how a template would help here. The type of c++ templates are still determined in compile time (std::vector vec ...). Also note that Matlab defines all variables as double by default unless something else is stated. You basically want runtime checks for your code. I can think of one solution as using a function with a persistent variable. The variable is set once per run. When you generate variables you would then have to generate all variables you want to have as float through this function. This will slow down assignment though, since you have to call a function to assign variables.
This example is somehow an implementation of the singleton pattern (but not exactly). The persistent variable type is set at the first use and cannot change later in the program (assuming that you do not do anything stupid as clearing the variable explicitly). I would recommend to go for hardcoding single in case performance is an issue, instead of having runtime checks or assignment functions or classes or what you can come up with.
function c = assignFloat(a,b)
persistent type;
if (isempty(type) & nargin==2)
type = b;
elseif (isempty(type))
type = 'single';
% elseif(nargin==2), error('Do not set twice!') % Optional code, imo unnecessary.
end
if (strcmp(type,'single'))
c = single(a);
return;
end
c = double(a);
end
I have an anonymous function that I would like to manipulate in string form then use with fsolve.
When I do this the references in the anonymous function to constants are lost and fsolve fails.
The problem is easily illustrated.
The following works:
A=3;
myfun=#(x)sin(A*x);
x = fsolve(#(x)myfun(x),[1 4],optimoptions('fsolve','Display','off'))
The following throws an error as explained here:
A=3;
myfun=#(x)sin(A*x);
mystring=func2str(myfun);
%string operations would go here such as strrep(mystring,'A','A^2') or whatever
myfun2=str2func(mystring);
x = fsolve(#(x)myfun2(x),[1 4],optimoptions('fsolve','Display','off'))
Is there some way I CAN safely manipulate an anonymous function while retaining references to constant parameters?
more info
Specifically I'm writing a simple wrapper to allow fsolve to accept imaginary numbers for simple cases. The following illustrates a working example without a constant parameter:
myeqn=#(x)0.5*x^2-5*x+14.5;
cX0=1+1*1i;
f1=strrep(func2str(myeqn),'#(x)','');
f2=strrep((f1),'x','(x(1)+(x(2))*1i)');
f3=strcat('#(x)[real(',f2,'); imag(',f2,')]');
fc=str2func(f3);
opts=optimoptions('fsolve','Display','off');
result=arrayfun(#(cinput)[1 1i]*(real(fsolve(fc,[real(cinput);imag(cinput)],opts))),cX0)
As in the failed example above if I include a parameter in my wrapper the process fails with the same error as above.
I originally suggested to use the symbolic math toolbox, but reading your question again I realized it's just a simple substitution of input parameters. You can achieve this using function handles without any string processing.
myeqn=#(x)0.5*x^2-5*x+14.5;
cX0=1+1*1i;
wrapper=#(x,f)([real(f(x(1)+x(2)*i)),imag(f(x(1)+x(2)*i))])
opts=optimoptions('fsolve','Display','off');
result=arrayfun(#(cinput)[1 1i]*(real(fsolve(#(x)wrapper(x,myeqn),[real(cinput);imag(cinput)],opts))),cX0)
As much as I hate to suggest using the eval function, you could do:
myfun2 = eval(mystring);
Using eval is kinda frowned upon because it makes code hard to analyze (since arbitrary nastiness could be going on in that string), but don't let other people's coding style stop you from doing what works :)
In your longer example, this would correspond to changing the line:
fc=str2func(f3);
to:
fc=eval(f3);
Again, the use of eval is strongly discouraged, so you should consider alternatives to this type of string manipulation of function definitions.
Is there an idiomatic way in Matlab to bind the value of an expression to the nth return value of another expression?
For example, say I want an array of indices corresponding to the maximum value of a number of vectors stored in a cell array. I can do that by
function I = max_index(varargin)
[~,I]=max(varargin{:});
cellfun(#max_index, my_data);
But this requires one to define a function (max_index) specific for each case one wants to select a particular return value in an expression. I can of course define a generic function that does what I want:
function y = nth_return(n,fun,varargin)
[vals{1:n}] = fun(varargin{:});
y = vals{n};
And call it like:
cellfun(#(x) nth_return(2,#max,x), my_data)
Adding such functions, however, makes code snippets less portable and harder to understand. Is there an idiomatic to achieve the same result without having to rely on the custom nth_return function?
This is as far as I know not possible in another way as with the solutions you mention. So just use the syntax:
[~,I]=max(var);
Or indeed create an extra function. But I would also suggest against this. Just write the extra line of code, in case you want to use the output in another function. I found two earlier questions on stackoverflow, which adress the same topic, and seem to confirm that this is not possible.
Skipping outputs with anonymous function in MATLAB
How to elegantly ignore some return values of a MATLAB function?
The reason why the ~ operator was added to MATLAB some versions ago was to prevent you from saving variables you do not need. If there would be a syntax like the one you are searching for, this would not have been necessary.
I have a function that returns two values, like so:
[a b] = myfunc(x)
Is there a way to get the second return value without using a temporary variable, and without altering the function?
What I'm looking for is something like this:
abs(secondreturnvalue(myfunc(x)))
not that i know of. subsref doesn't seem to work in this case, possibly because the second variable isn't even returned from the function.
since matlab 2009b it is possible to use the notation
[~, b] = function(x)
if you don't need the first argument, but this still uses a temporary variable for b.
Unless there is some pressing need to do this, I would probably advise against it. The clarity of your code will suffer. Storing the outputs in temporary variables and then passing these variables to another function will make your code cleaner, and the different ways you could do this are outlined here: How to elegantly ignore some return values of a MATLAB function?.
However, if you really want or need to do this, the only feasible way I can think of would be to create your own function secondreturnvalue. Here's a more general example called nth_output:
function value = nth_output(N,fcn,varargin)
[value{1:N}] = fcn(varargin{:});
value = value{N};
end
And you would call it by passing as inputs 1) the output argument number you want, 2) a function handle to myfunc, and 3) whatever input arguments you need to pass to myfunc:
abs(nth_output(2,#myfunc,x))