Skip to main content

Prepare mathematica output to be parsed in Python


I have Mathematica output that I would like to parse in python so I can generate equivalent expressions. So suppose I have the following:


testing2 = 
 ExpandAll[
  D[(x - A)^2 + (y - B)^2 +  ( 
      v - C)^2 + (x + y - (S + v) - D)^2  - λ1*x - λ2*
     y - λ3*v - λ4*(x + y - (S + v))  , {{x, y, v}}]]


Then I solve the following system:


Solve[Thread[
  testing2 == 0 &&  -λ1*x == 0 && - λ2*y == 
    0 && -λ3*v == 0 && - λ4*(x + y - (S + v)) == 
    0], {x, y, v, x, y, 
  v, λ1, λ2, λ3, λ4}]

Which returns a list of possible solutions. One possible solution is the following:


  {x -> 0, y -> 0, 
 v -> 1/2 (C - D - S), λ1 -> -2 A - C - D - 

   S, λ2 -> -2 B - C - D - S, λ3 -> 0, λ4 -> 
  0}

Since there are a lot of possible solutions, it is quite difficult to code everything by hand. I was trying to have the output put the multiplication symbol in the appropriate place. If I can do this, then it will be easier to parse the output in python. So suppose Mathematica is outputing 2A, I would like it to output 2*A. Is this possible?



Answer



Since python has pretty close syntax as Fortran, converting the expression to FortranForm is what I usually do in this case.


testing2 = 
 ExpandAll[
  D[(x - A)^2 + (y - B)^2 + (v - C)^2 + (x + y - (S + v) - 
       D)^2 - λ1*x - λ2*y - λ3*

     v - λ4*(x + y - (S + v)), {{x, y, v}}]]
sols = {x, y, v, x, y, 
   v, λ1, λ2, λ3, λ4} /. 
  Solve[Thread[
    testing2 == 0 && -λ1*x == 0 && -λ2*y == 
      0 && -λ3*v == 0 && -λ4*(x + y - (S + v)) == 
      0], {x, y, v, x, y, 
    v, λ1, λ2, λ3, λ4}]
sols // FortranForm


This is not ideal, but a good starting point for python to work with.


If you have access to Maple. Another solution is using Maple. CodeGeneration is pretty handy in Maple, it can also generate function using numpy and scipy


with(MmaTranslator);
print(??); # input placeholder
e := FromMma("{{0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -2 (A + D + S), -2 (B + D + S), -2 (C - D - S), 
  0}, {0, 0, 1/2 (C - D - S), 0, 0, 
  1/2 (C - D - S), -2 A - C - D - S, -2 B - C - D - S, 0, 0}, {0, 
  0, -S, 0, 0, -S, -2 (A + C + S), -2 (B + C + S), 0, 
  2 (C - D + S)}, {0, S, 0, 0, S, 0, -2 (A - B + S), 
  0, -2 (B + C - S), -2 (B + D - S)}, {0, 1/2 (B + C + S), 

  1/2 (B + C - S), 0, 1/2 (B + C + S), 
  1/2 (B + C - S), -2 A + B - C - S, 0, 0, -B + C - 2 D + S}, {0, 
  1/2 (B + D + S), 0, 0, 1/2 (B + D + S), 0, -2 A + B - D - S, 
  0, -B - 2 C + D + S, 0}, {0, 1/3 (2 B + C + D + S), 
  1/3 (B + 2 C - D - S), 0, 1/3 (2 B + C + D + S), 
  1/3 (B + 2 C - D - S), -(2/3) (3 A - B + C + D + S), 0, 0, 0}, {S, 
  0, 0, S, 0, 0, 0, 
  2 (A - B - S), -2 (A + C - S), -2 (A + D - S)}, {1/2 (A - B + S), 
  1/2 (-A + B + S), 0, 1/2 (A - B + S), 1/2 (-A + B + S), 0, 0, 
  0, -A - B - 2 C + S, -A - B - 2 D + S}, {1/2 (A + C + S), 0, 

  1/2 (A + C - S), 1/2 (A + C + S), 0, 1/2 (A + C - S), 0, 
  A - 2 B - C - S, 0, -A + C - 2 D + S}, {1/3 (2 A - B + C + S), 
  1/3 (-A + 2 B + C + S), 1/3 (A + B + 2 C - S), 
  1/3 (2 A - B + C + S), 1/3 (-A + 2 B + C + S), 
  1/3 (A + B + 2 C - S), 0, 0, 
  0, -(2/3) (A + B - C + 3 D - S)}, {1/2 (A + D + S), 0, 0, 
  1/2 (A + D + S), 0, 0, 0, A - 2 B - D - S, -A - 2 C + D + S, 
  0}, {1/3 (2 A - B + D + S), 1/3 (-A + 2 B + D + S), 0, 
  1/3 (2 A - B + D + S), 1/3 (-A + 2 B + D + S), 0, 0, 
  0, -(2/3) (A + B + 3 C - D - S), 0}, {1/3 (2 A + C + D + S), 0, 

  1/3 (A + 2 C - D - S), 1/3 (2 A + C + D + S), 0, 
  1/3 (A + 2 C - D - S), 0, 2/3 (A - 3 B - C - D - S), 0, 
  0}, {1/4 (3 A - B + C + D + S), 1/4 (-A + 3 B + C + D + S), 
  1/4 (A + B + 3 C - D - S), 1/4 (3 A - B + C + D + S), 
  1/4 (-A + 3 B + C + D + S), 1/4 (A + B + 3 C - D - S), 0, 0, 0, 0}}");
with(CodeGeneration);
Python(e);

Here is an example from help of Maple


# Translate a procedure involving linear algebra.

detHilbert := proc(M, n :: posint) uses LinearAlgebra;
   return Determinant( HilbertMatrix( n ) );
end proc:
Python(detHilbert);
import numpy.linalg
import scipy.linalg

def detHilbert (M, n):
    return(numpy.linalg.det(scipy.linalg.hilbert(n)))


Update: sympy method


sympy has now support translate MMA code to sympy. Since this is a pretty new method, I will demonstrate a bit here.


In [1]: from sympy.parsing import mathematica

In [2]: mathematica.parse('Sin[a]^2 27 + 54 x + 36 x^2 + 8 x^3')
Out[2]: 'sin(a)**2 27+54 x+36 x**2+8 x**3'

Noted: sympy does not handle the multiplication correctly now, but I believe this will be solved in the future. The list conversion is not correct as well.


Currently, you can do something like this:


in MMA:



In[178]:= {Sin[a]^2 27 + 54 x + 36 x^2 + 8 x^3, ArcTan[x]} // InputForm

Out[178]//InputForm=
{54*x + 36*x^2 + 8*x^3 + 27*Sin[a]^2, ArcTan[x]}

Copy the output to Python:


In [3]: mathematica.parse('54*x + 36*x^2 + 8*x^3 + 27*Sin[a]^2')
Out[3]: '54*x+36*x**2+8*x**3+27*sin(a)**2'

This result can be further converted to sympy object



In [4]: mathematica.sympify(_)
Out[4]: 8*x**3 + 36*x**2 + 54*x + 27*sin(a)**2

You may also use mathematica function in the module to merge above two functions. But I do not suggest to use the function. Because for parse function, you get the parse result in any case, but mathematica function returns a result only the result is a valid sympy expression. Here is a example of using mathematica function:


In [1]: from sympy.parsing import mathematica as M
In [2]: M.mathematica('4a+8b^2+Cos[9a]')
Out[2]: 4*a + 8*b**2 + cos(9*a)

It is very welcomed if you can improve Mathematica parser in sympy.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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}]
Post a Comment
Read more

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}]
Post a Comment
Read more

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....
Post a Comment
Read more