Skip to main content

bugs - Problems with Displaying Output for Summation


Bug introduced in 10.2.0 or earlier and fixed in 10.4.0




Consider the following code.


ClearAll["Global`*"]
InactSum = Inactive[Sum]
InactInt = Inactive[Integrate]

A = InactInt[
Subscript[\[Phi], j][x] InactSum[
Subscript[a, i] Subscript[\[Phi], i][x], {i, 1, n}] , {x, a, b}]
B = InactInt[
InactSum[Subscript[a, i]
Subscript[\[Phi], i][x] Subscript[\[Phi], j][x], {i, 1, n}] , {x,
a, b}]
Interchange = InactInt[InactSum[p_, q_], r_] -> InactSum[InactInt[p, r], q];
A /. Interchange
B /. Interchange


I have introduced two expressions


$$\begin{align} A &= \int_{a}^{b} \phi_{j}(x) \left[ \sum_{i=1}^{n} a_i \phi_{i}(x) \right] dx \\ B &= \int_{a}^{b} \left[ \sum_{i=1}^{n} a_i \phi_{i}(x) \phi_{j}(x)\right] dx \end{align}$$


where in $A$, $\phi_{j}$ is outside the summation while in $B$ it is inside the summation. Technically, these are both the same. But when I was trying to write a transformation rule that interchanges the integration and summation, then I noticed that it just applies to $B$ and not to $A$. So, I understood that Mathematica understands the little difference between these two but


The Standard Output for Both is the Same!


enter image description here


This prevents user from understanding the difference and it just shows itself when you want to apply the transformation rule.


I think this is a bug. In my opinion, the standard output for these two should be different. I would be happy to see what you think.



Answer



This is a bug I fixed in 10.4.0. Sorry for the inconvenience! To work around it in earlier versions, evaluate the following block of code:



InactiveDump`assembleInactiveSumProduct[{args_, disp_, interp_, char_,
tag_, tooltip_, fmt_}] :=
TemplateBox[args, tag, DisplayFunction -> Function[disp],
InterpretationFunction -> Function[interp], SyntaxForm -> char]

The SyntaxForm which specifies precedence for parenthesization was missing before 10.4.0.


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.