This is a very simple question, but found surprisingly very little about it online...
I want to find the minimizer of a function in maple, I am not sure how to indicate which is the variable of interest? Let us take a very simple case, I want the symbolic minimizer of a quadratic expression in x, with parameters a, b and c.
Without specifying something, it does minimize over all variables, a, b, c and x.
f4 := a+b*x+c*x^2
minimize(f4, location)
I tried to specify the variable in the function, did not work either:
f5 :=(x) ->a+b*x+c*x^2
minimize(f5, location)
How should I do this? And, how would I do if I wanted over two variables, x and y?
fxy := a+b*x+c*x^2 + d*y^2 +e*y
f4 := a+b*x+c*x^2:
extrema(f4, {}, x);
/ 2\
|4 a c - b |
< ---------- >
| 4 c |
\ /
fxy := a+b*x+c*x^2 + d*y^2 +e*y:
extrema(fxy, {}, {x,y});
/ 2 2\
|4 a c d - b d - c e |
< --------------------- >
| 4 c d |
\ /
The nature of the extrema will depend upon the values of the parameters. For your first example above (quadratic in x) it will depend on the signum of c.
The command extrema accepts an optional fourth argument, such as an unassigned name (or an uneval-quoted name) to which is assigns the candidate solution points (as a side-effect of its calculation). Eg,
restart;
f4 := a+b*x+c*x^2:
extrema(f4, {}, x, 'cand');
2
4 a c - b
{----------}
4 c
cand;
b
{{x = - ---}}
2 c
fxy := a+b*x+c*x^2 + d*y^2 +e*y:
extrema(fxy, {}, {x,y}, 'cand');
2 2
4 a c d - b d - c e
{---------------------}
4 c d
cand;
b e
{{x = - ---, y = - ---}}
2 c 2 d
Alternatively, you may set up the partial derivatives and solve them manually. Note that for these two examples there is just a one result (for each) returned by solve.
restart:
f4 := a+b*x+c*x^2:
solve({diff(f4,x)},{x});
b
{x = - ---}
2 c
normal(eval(f4,%));
2
4 a c - b
----------
4 c
fxy := a+b*x+c*x^2 + d*y^2 +e*y:
solve({diff(fxy,x),diff(fxy,y)},{x,y});
b e
{x = - ---, y = - ---}
2 c 2 d
normal(eval(fxy,%));
2 2
4 a c d - b d - c e
---------------------
4 c d
The code for the extrema command can be viewed, by issuing the command showstat(extrema). You can see how it accounts for the case of solve returning multiple results.
Related
I am working on solving a system of boolean equations. Specifically, I am trying to find the values of bit vectors S1...S3 and/or C1...C3 such that their XOR results are given in the table below (in hexadecimal values). Any ideas?
So we have six 32-digit sequences we want to determine, for a total of 192 unknown hexadecimal digits. We can focus on just the first digits of each to illustrate how we could try to solve for the others.
Let's call the first digits of S1, S2 and S3 a, b and c, respectively. Let's also call the first digits of C1, C2 and C3 x, y and z, respectively. Then we have the following equations, where * stands for XOR:
a * x = E b * x = A c * x = 7
a * y = 2 b * y = 6 c * y = B
a * z = 1 b * z = 5 c * z = 8
Let us note some properties of XOR. First, it is associative. That is, A XOR (B XOR C) is always equal to (A XOR B) XOR C. Second, it is commutative. That is, A XOR B is always equal to B XOR A. Also, A XOR A is always the "false" vector (0) for any A. A XOR FALSE is always A where FALSE stands for the "false" vector (0). These facts let us do algebra to solve for variables and substitute to solve. We can solve for c first, substitute in and simplify to get:
a * x = E b * x = A z * x = F
a * y = 2 b * y = 6 z * y = 3
a * z = 1 b * z = 5 c = 8 * z
We can do z next:
a * x = E b * x = A y * x = C
a * y = 2 b * y = 6 z = 3 * y
a * y = 2 b * y = 6 c = 8 * z
We found a couple of our equations are redundant. We expected that if the system were not inconsistent since we had nine equations in six unknowns. Let's continue with y:
a * x = E b * x = A y = C * x
a * x = E b * x = A z = 3 * y
a * x = E b * x = A c = 8 * z
We find now that we have even more unhelpful equations. Now we are in trouble, though: we only have five distinct equalities and six unknowns. This means that our system is underspecified and we will have multiple solutions. We can pick one or list them all. Let us continue with x:
a * b = 4 x = b * A y = C * x
a * b = 4 x = b * A z = 3 * y
a * b = 4 x = b * A c = 8 * z
What this means we have one solution for every solution to the equation a * b = 4. How many solutions are there? Well, there must be 16, one for every value of a. Here is a table:
a: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F
b: 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 C D E F 8 9 A B
We can fill in the rest of the table using the other equations we determined. Each row will then be a solution.
You can continue this process for each of the 32 places in the hexadecimal sequences. For each position, you will find:
there are multiple solutions, as we found for the first position
there is a unique solution, if you end up with six useful equations
there are no solutions, if you find one of the equations becomes a contradiction upon substitution (e.g., A = 3).
If you find a position that has no solutions, then the whole system has no solutions. Otherwise, you'll have a number of solutions that is the product of the nonzero numbers of solutions for each of the 32 positions.
I have three variables : A, B, C.
I want to write a set of linear equations such that
X = 1 if atleast 2 of A,B,C are ones.
X= 0 if only one of A,B,C is one.
X = 0 if all of them are zero.
A,B and C are binary (0,1).
Kindly suggest a linear equation for this.
Thank you.
To implement
A+B+C ≥ 2 => X=1
A+B+C ≤ 1 => X=0
we can write simply:
2X ≤ A+B+C ≤ 2X+1
A,B,C,X ∈ {0,1}
In practice, you may have to formulate the sandwich equation as two inequalities.
X >= A + B - 1
X >= B + C - 1
X >= A + C - 1
X <= A + B
X <= B + C
X <= A + C
as mentioned in comment, you didn't define outcome for A=B=C=0, but in that case X -> 0 by inspection.
Hello Let's say I have theres two functions
F1= a*x^(2) + b
F2 = c*x
Where a, b and c are a constant and x is a variablem how do can I make matlab gives me a simplified version of F1*F2 so the answer may be
a*c*x^(3) + b*c*x
This is what I have in matlab
syms x a b c
F1 = a*x^(2) +b;
F2 = c*x^(2);
simplify(F1*F2)
ans =
c*x^2*(a*x^2 + b)
When I multiply in matlab it's just giving me (ax^(2) + b)(c*x)
Try this commands:
syms a x b c
F1= a*x^(2) + b
F2 = c*x
F=F1*F2
collect(F)
which will give you:
ans =
a*c*x^3 + b*c*x
The command collect is useful when working with polynoms. The opposite command is pretty. It will give you c*x*(a*x^2 + b)
Suppose that gcd(e,m) = g. Find integer d such that (e x d) = g mod m
Where m and e are greater than or equal to 1.
The following problem seems to be solvable algebraically but I've tried doing it and it give me an integer number. Sometimes, the solution for d is an integer and sometimes it isn't. How can I approach this problem?
d can be computed with the extended euklidean algorithm, see e.g. here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_Euclidean_algorithm
The a,b on that page are your e,m, and your d will be the x.
Perhaps you are assuming that both e and m are integers, but the problem allows them to be non-integers? There is only one case that gives an integer solution when both e and m are integers.
Why strictly integer output is not a reasonable outcome if e != m:
When you look at a fraction like 3/7 say, and refer to its denominator as the numerator's "divisor", this is a loose sense of the word from a classical math-y perspective. When you talk about the gcd (greatest common divisor), the "d" refers to an integer that divides the numerator (an integer) evenly, resulting in another integer: 4 is a divisor of 8, because 8/4 = 2 and 2 is an integer. A computer science or discrete mathematics perspective might frame a divisor as a number d that for a given number a gives 0 when we take a % d (a mod d for discrete math). Can you see that the absolute value of a divisor can't exceed the absolute value of the numerator? If it did, you would get pieces of pie, instead of whole pies - example:
4 % a = 0 for a in Z (Z being the set of integers) while |a| <= 4 (in math-y notation, that set is: {a ∈ Z : |a| <= 4}), but
4 % a != 0 for a in Z while |a| > 4 (math-y: {a ∈ Z : |a| > 4}
), because when we divide 4 by stuff bigger than it, like 5, we get fractions (i.e. |4/a| < 1 when |a| > 4). Don't worry too much about the absolute value stuff if it throws you off - it is there to account for working with negative numbers since they are integers as well.
So, even the "greatest" of divisors for any given integer will be smaller than the integer. Otherwise it's not a divisor (see above, or Wikipedia on divisors).
Look at gcd(e, m) = g:
By the definition of % (mod for math people), for any two numbers number1 and number2, number1 % number2 never makes number1 bigger: number1 % number2 <= number1.
So substitute: (e * d) = g % m --> (e * d) <= g
By the paragraphs above and definition of gcd being a divisor of both e and m: g <= e, m.
To make (e * d) <= g such that d, g are both integers, knowing that g <= e since g is a divisor of e, we have to make the left side smaller to match g. You can only make an integer smaller with multiplcation if the other multipland is 0 or a fraction. The problem specifies that d is an integer, so we one case that works - the d = 0 case - and infinitely many that give a contradiction - contradiction that e, m, and d all be integers.
If e == m:
This is the d = 0 case:
If e == m, then gcd(e, m) = e = m - example: greatest common divisor of 3 and 3 is 3
Then (e * d) = g % m is (e * d) = m % m and m % m = 0 so (e * d) = 0 implying d = 0
How to code a function that will find d when either of e or m might be NON-integer:
A lot of divisor problems are done iteratively, like "find the gcd" or "find a prime number". That works in part because those problems deal strictly with integers, which are countable. With this problem, we need to allow e or m to be non-integer in order to have a solution for cases other than e = m. The set of rational numbers is NOT countable, however, so an iterative solution would eventually make your program crash. With this problem, you really just want a formula, and possibly some cases. You might set it up like this:
If e == m
return 0 # since (e * d) = m % m -> d = 0
Else
return g / e
Lastly:
Another thing that might be useful depending on what you do with this problem is the fact that the right-hand-side is always either g or 0, because g <= m since g is a divisor of m (see all the stuff above). In the cases where g < m, g % m = g. In the case where g == m, g % m = 0.
The #asp answer with the link to the Wikipedia page on the Euclidean Algorithm is good.
The #aidenhjj comment about trying the math-specific version of StackOverflow is good.
In case this is for a math class and you aren't used to coding: <=, >=, ==, and != are computer speak for ≤, ≥, "are equal", and "not equal" respectively.
Good luck.
I've an assignment where I basically need to create a function which, given two basis (which I'm representing as a matrix of vectors), it should return the change of basis matrix from one basis to the other.
So far this is the function I came up with, based on the algorithm that I will explain next:
function C = cob(A, B)
% Returns C, which is the change of basis matrix from A to B,
% that is, given basis A and B, we represent B in terms of A.
% Assumes that A and B are square matrices
n = size(A, 1);
% Creates a square matrix full of zeros
% of the same size as the number of rows of A.
C = zeros(n);
for i=1:n
C(i, :) = (A\B(:, i))';
end
end
And here are my tests:
clc
clear out
S = eye(3);
B = [1 0 0; 0 1 0; 2 1 1];
D = B;
disp(cob(S, B)); % Returns cob matrix from S to B.
disp(cob(B, D));
disp(cob(S, D));
Here's the algorithm that I used based on some notes. Basically, if I have two basis B = {b1, ... , bn} and D = {d1, ... , dn} for a certain vector space, and I want to represent basis D in terms of basis B, I need to find a change of basis matrix S. The vectors of these bases are related in the following form:
(d1 ... dn)^T = S * (b1, ... , bn)^T
Or, by splitting up all the rows:
d1 = s11 * b1 + s12 * b2 + ... + s1n * bn
d2 = s21 * b1 + s22 * b2 + ... + s2n * bn
...
dn = sn1 * b1 + sn2 * b2 + ... + snn * bn
Note that d1, b1, d2, b2, etc, are all column vectors. This can be further represented as
d1 = [b1 b2 ... bn] * [s11; s12; ... s1n];
d2 = [b1 b2 ... bn] * [s21; s22; ... s2n];
...
dn = [b1 b2 ... bn] * [sn1; sn2; ... s1n];
Lets call the matrix [b1 b2 ... bn], whose columns are the columns vectors of B, A, so we have:
d1 = A * [s11; s12; ... s1n];
d2 = A * [s21; s22; ... s2n];
...
dn = A * [sn1; sn2; ... s1n];
Note that what we need now to find are all the entries sij for i=1...n and j=1...n. We can do that by left-multiplying both sides by the inverse of A, i.e. by A^(-1).
So, S might look something like this
S = [s11 s12 ... s1n;
s21 s22 ... s2n;
...
sn1 sn2 ... snn;]
If this idea is correct, to find the change of basis matrix S from B to D is really what I'm doing in the code.
Is my idea correct? If not, what's wrong? If yes, can I improve it?
Things become much easier when one has an intuitive understanding of the algorithm.
There are two key points to understand here:
C(B,B) is the identity matrix (i.e., do nothing to change from B to B)
C(E,D)C(B,E) = C(B,D) , think of this as B -> E -> D = B -> D
A direct corollary of 1 and 2 is
C(E,D)C(D,E) = C(D,D), the identity matrix
in other words
C(E,D) = C(D,E)-1
Summarizing.
Algorithm to calculate the matrix C(B,D) to change from B to D:
Define C(B,E) = [b1, ..., bn] (column vectors)
Define C(D,E) = [d1, ..., dn] (column vectors)
Compute C(E,D) as the inverse of C(D,E).
Compute C(B,D) as the product C(E,D)C(B,E).
Example
B = {(1,2), (3,4)}
D = {(1,1), (1,-1)}
C(B,E) = | 1 3 |
| 2 4 |
C(D,E) = | 1 1 |
| 1 -1 |
C(E,D) = | .5 .5 |
| .5 -.5 |
C(B,D) = | .5 .5 | | 1 3 | = | 1.5 3.5 |
| .5 -.5 | | 2 4 | | -.5 -.5 |
Verification
1.5 d1 + -.5 d2 = 1.5(1,1) + -.5(1,-1) = (1,2) = b1
3.5 d1 + -.5 d2 = 3.5(1,1) + -.5(1,-1) = (3,4) = b2
which shows that the columns of C(B,D) are in fact the coordinates of b1 and b2 in the base D.