Skip to main content

style - Correct my use of BarChart labels


I need to make a good bar chart based on the table below (the number of nodes with its probability of falling correspond to each OF):


Table of data


Thanks to kglr I got the necessary BarChart:



data14GAOF = {{33/36, 3/36}, {11/36, 25/36}, {27/36, 8/36, 
    1/36}, {14/36, 22/36}, {13/36, 10/36, 2/36, 1/36, 1/36, 1/36, 
    2/36, 4/36, 1/36, 1/36}, {8/36, 16/36, 8/36, 4/36}};
labels14GAOF = 
  Style[#, FontSize -> 18, White] & /@ {"node 4", "node 9", "node 7", 
    "node 3", "node 5", "node 6", "node 8", "node 10", "node 11", 
    "node 13"};
grouplabels14GAOF = 
  Style[#, Black, Bold, FontSize -> 18] & /@ {"OF1(N-1)", "OF1", 
    "OF2(N-1)", "OF2", "OF3(N-1)", "OF3"};

labeleddata14GAOF = 
  Labeled[##, Axis] & @@@ 
   Transpose[{SortBy[-First[#] &] /@ (MapIndexed[
          Labeled[#, labels14GAOF[[#2[[1]]]], Center] &, #] & /@ 
        data14GAOF), grouplabels14GAOF}];

BarChart[labeleddata14GAOF, 
 ChartStyle -> {GrayLevel[0.1], GrayLevel[0.2], GrayLevel[0.3], 
   GrayLevel[0.4], GrayLevel[0.5], GrayLevel[0.6], GrayLevel[0.65], 
   GrayLevel[0.7], GrayLevel[0.75], GrayLevel[0.8],}, 

 ChartLayout -> "Stacked", ImageSize -> 900, 
 AxesStyle -> Directive[Black, 24], BarSpacing -> {0, 0.8}]

But, unfortunately, I didn't take something into account and, as a result, BarChart looks like (there is a mismatch in the last column which I marked):


enter image description here


There is a strong likelihood that I chose inappropriate way to visualize and represent results.


Two questions



  • What I have to do in order to get the right labels?

  • How to make the columns closer to each other in accordance with the grouping (group OF1, group OF2, group OF3).




Answer



This is one way it can be done.


data14GAOF =
  {{33/36, 3/36},
   {11/36, 25/36},
   {27/36, 1/36, 8/36},
   {14/36, 22/36},
   {1/36, 13/36, 1/36, 1/36, 2/36, 2/36, 10/36, 4/36, 1/36, 1/36},
   {8/36, 8/36, 16/36, 4/36}};


labels14GAOF =
  {{"node 4", "node 9"},
   {"node 4", "node 9"},
   {"node 4", "node 7", "node 9"},
   {"node 4", "node 9"},
   {"node 3", "node 4", "node 5", "node 6", "node 7", 
    "node 8", "node 9", "node 10", "node 11", "node 13"},
   {"node 4", "node 5", "node 9", "node 11"}};


labeleddata14GAOF =
   MapThread[
     Labeled[#1, #2, Axis] &,
     {SortBy[-First[#] &] /@
        Apply[
          Labeled[#1, Style[#2, FontSize -> 16, White], Center] &, 
          Transpose /@ Transpose[{data14GAOF, labels14GAOF}],
          {2}],
      grouplabels14GAOF}];


BarChart[labeleddata14GAOF,
  ChartStyle ->
    {GrayLevel[0.1], GrayLevel[0.2], GrayLevel[0.3], GrayLevel[0.4], GrayLevel[0.5], 
     GrayLevel[0.6], GrayLevel[0.65], GrayLevel[0.7], GrayLevel[0.75], GrayLevel[0.8]},
   ChartLayout -> "Stacked", 
   AxesStyle -> Directive[Black, 24],
   BarSpacing -> {Automatic, .3}, 
   ImageSize -> Full]

chart



Notes




  • The main change in strategy is in writing a list of the labels for each bar separately. I don't think trying to pick them out a common list of all node labels was a good idea; it is just too hard to get them right that way.




  • It makes things easier to delay all the styling to label creation time.




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

mathematical optimization - Minimizing using indices, error: Part::pkspec1: The expression cannot be used as a part specification

I want to use Minimize where the variables to minimize are indices pointing into an array. Here a MWE that hopefully shows what my problem is. vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@ { Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; Minimize[{Total@((vec1[[#]] - vec2[[u[#]]])^2 & /@ Range[1, 3]), cons}, vars, Integers] The error I get: Part::pkspec1: The expression u[1] cannot be used as a part specification. >> Answer Ok, it seems that one can get around Mathematica trying to evaluate vec2[[u[1]]] too early by using the function Indexed[vec2,u[1]] . The working MWE would then look like the following: vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@{ Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; NMinimize[ {Total@((vec1[[#]] - Indexed[vec2, u[#]])^2 & /@ R...
Post a Comment
Read more

functions - Get leading series expansion term?

Given a function f[x] , I would like to have a function leadingSeries that returns just the leading term in the series around x=0 . For example: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x)] x and leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x^3)/4)/(4 + x)] -(1/(16 x^3)) Is there such a function in Mathematica? Or maybe one can implement it efficiently? EDIT I finally went with the following implementation, based on Carl Woll 's answer: lds[ex_,x_]:=( (ex/.x->(x+O[x]^2))/.SeriesData[U_,Z_,L_List,Mi_,Ma_,De_]:>SeriesData[U,Z,{L[[1]]},Mi,Mi+1,De]//Quiet//Normal) The advantage is, that this one also properly works with functions whose leading term is a constant: lds[Exp[x],x] 1 Answer Update 1 Updated to eliminate SeriesData and to not return additional terms Perhaps you could use: leadingSeries[expr_, x_] := Normal[expr /. x->(x+O[x]^2) /. a_List :> Take[a, 1]] Then for your examples: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x), x] leadingSeries[Exp[x], x] leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x...
Post a Comment
Read more

What is and isn't a valid variable specification for Manipulate?

I have an expression whose terms have arguments (representing subscripts), like this: myExpr = A[0] + V[1,T] I would like to put it inside a Manipulate to see its value as I move around the parameters. (The goal is eventually to plot it wrt one of the variables inside.) However, Mathematica complains when I set V[1,T] as a manipulated variable: Manipulate[Evaluate[myExpr], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, T], 0, 1}] (*Manipulate::vsform: Manipulate argument {V[1,T],0,1} does not have the correct form for a variable specification. >> *) As a workaround, if I get rid of the symbol T inside the argument, it works fine: Manipulate[ Evaluate[myExpr /. T -> 15], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, 15], 0, 1}] Why this behavior? Can anyone point me to the documentation that says what counts as a valid variable? And is there a way to get Manpiulate to accept an expression with a symbolic argument as a variable? Investigations I've done so far: I tried using variableQ from this answer , but it says V[1...
Post a Comment
Read more