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

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...

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...

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...