Skip to main content

dynamic - Control variable and body variable decoupling in Manipulate


This issue was raised as an offside problem in this thread. Consider the following example, that does not work as expected:


Manipulate[{x, r}, {{x, r}}, {r, 0, 1}]


Note that as r is manipulated the InputField of x is updated (as the initial value of x is set to be r) but not the x displayed as the body of the Manipulate. Interestingly, if x depends on r in a different way (endpoints of range instead of initial value) the example works as expected: whenever r is changed it changes both the displayed values of x:


Manipulate[{x, r}, {x, r, 1}, {r, 0, 1}]

It seems like that in Manipulate changing a variable (r) does not trigger a re-evaluation of the initial-value-dependent variable (x) displayed in the body though its value displayed in the control is updated correctly.


I have no idea why the first example does not work the same way as the second does. While it might be said that this is a feature, I would argue that the unexplained decoupling of the two representations of x (as body and control) is quite disturbing.


Workarounds




  1. The re-evaluation can be triggered by making x dynamic:



    Manipulate[{Dynamic[x], r}, {{x, r}}, {r, 0, 1}]


  2. Moving the definition of x out of the control-arguments to the body of the Manipulate:


    Manipulate[{x = r, r}, {r, 0, 1}]


  3. Rewriting it in DynamicModule: it has an explicit function inside the Dynamic of r that sets x whenever r is modified:


    Panel@DynamicModule[{x, r = .5},
    x = r;

    Grid[{
    {"x", InputField[Dynamic[x]]},
    {"r", Slider[Dynamic[r, (r = #; x = #) &], {0, 1}]},
    {Panel[Dynamic@{x, r}], SpanFromLeft}
    }, Alignment -> Left]
    ]



Answer



Using InputForm sheds some light:



Manipulate[{x, r}, {{x, r}}, {r, 0, 1}] // InputForm
(* Manipulate[{x, r}, {{x, r}},{r, 0, 1}] *)

Manipulate[{x, r}, {x, r, 1}, {r, 0, 1}] // InputForm
(* Manipulate[{x, r}, {x, Dynamic[r], 1}, {r, 0, 1}]*)

The desired behaviour of the first example can be achieve by this modification:


Manipulate[{x, r}, {x, r}, {r, 0, 1}]

Which has an input form of:



Manipulate[{x, r}, {x, r}, {r, 0, 1}] // InputForm
(* Manipulate[{x, r}, {x, Dynamic[r]}, {r, 0, 1}] *)

However Manipulate doesn't know how to render the control type, so therefore


Manipulate[{x, r}, {x, r, ControlType -> InputField}, {r, 0, 1}] // InputForm
(* Manipulate[{x, r}, {x, Dynamic[r], ControlType -> InputField}, {r, 0, 1}] *)

allows the first example to have similar behaviour to the second example.


Edit


In reply to the comment from @István Zachar this is my best guess as to why -- with the qualifier that I mostly use DynamicModule not Manipulate so am not an expert on its inner workings.



Manipulate[{x, r}, {{x, r}}, {r, 0, 1}]

is of the form Manipulate[{x, r}, {{u, u_unit}}, {r, 0, 1}]. It seems like an incomplete expression and the syntax colouring for x doesn't indicate localization. This is confirmed by Manipulate[{x, r}, {{x, r, 1}}, {r, 0, 1}] which is of the form Manipulate[{x, r}, {{u, u_unit,u_label}}, {r, 0, 1}] and renders as


enter image description here


So as written (i.e. {{u, u_unit}}) there is a value to display in the input field, r, but there is not a complete definition for x.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - Filling between two spheres in SphericalPlot3D

Manipulate[ SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, Mesh -> None, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], {n, 0, 1}] I cant' seem to be able to make a filling between two spheres. I've already tried the obvious Filling -> {1 -> {2}} but Mathematica doesn't seem to like that option. Is there any easy way around this or ... Answer There is no built-in filling in SphericalPlot3D . One option is to use ParametricPlot3D to draw the surfaces between the two shells: Manipulate[ Show[SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], ParametricPlot3D[{ r {Sin[t] Cos[1.5 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[1.5 Pi], Cos[t]}, r {Sin[t] Cos[0 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[0 Pi], Cos[t]}}, {r, 1, 2 - n}, {t, 0, Pi}, PlotStyle -> Yellow, Mesh -> {2, 15}]], {n, 0, 1}]

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]

plotting - Mathematica: 3D plot based on combined 2D graphs

I have several sigmoidal fits to 3 different datasets, with mean fit predictions plus the 95% confidence limits (not symmetrical around the mean) and the actual data. I would now like to show these different 2D plots projected in 3D as in but then using proper perspective. In the link here they give some solutions to combine the plots using isometric perspective, but I would like to use proper 3 point perspective. Any thoughts? Also any way to show the mean points per time point for each series plus or minus the standard error on the mean would be cool too, either using points+vertical bars, or using spheres plus tubes. Below are some test data and the fit function I am using. Note that I am working on a logit(proportion) scale and that the final vertical scale is Log10(percentage). (* some test data *) data = Table[Null, {i, 4}]; data[[1]] = {{1, -5.8}, {2, -5.4}, {3, -0.8}, {4, -0.2}, {5, 4.6}, {1, -6.4}, {2, -5.6}, {3, -0.7}, {4, 0.04}, {5, 1.0}, {1, -6.8}, {2, -4.7}, {3, -1.