Skip to main content

bugs - Taylor expansion of a function containing QPochhammer[q, q, n]


I want to get the following series expansion:


Series[QPochhammer[q, q, 3], {q, 0,4}]


but in Mathematica 11.0, I obtain the following gibberish:


bad output


There weren't any problems of this kind in Mathematica 8.0.


The following example with the infinite product


Series[QPochhammer[q, q], {q, 0, 4}]

works perfectly fine, producing the series


good result


Documentation regarding QPochhammer can be found here.




Q: What causes this problem with finite products and how to avoid it?




Answer



The reason it doesn't work is because somewhere between v10.0 and v10.3, the seventh definition of QPochhammer was modified to check that the second argument does not depend on the expansion parameter.


To restore previous behavior, clear the seventh definition,


(*Triggers loading of definitions*)
Series[QPochhammer[0, x, 3], {x, 0, 1}];

(*Unprotect*)
Unprotect[QPochhammer];


QPochhammer /: 
 System`Private`InternalSeries[
   HoldPattern[QPochhammer][System`SeriesDump`w_, 
    System`SeriesDump`q_, 
    System`SeriesDump`k_Integer?Positive], {System`SeriesDump`z_, 
    System`SeriesDump`p_, System`SeriesDump`n_Integer}] /; 
 Internal`DependsOnQ[System`SeriesDump`w, System`SeriesDump`z] && ! 
    Internal`DependsOnQ[{System`SeriesDump`q, System`SeriesDump`p}, 
    System`SeriesDump`z] =.


Then add the definition from earlier versions,


QPochhammer /: 
 System`Private`InternalSeries[
   HoldPattern[QPochhammer][System`SeriesDump`w_, 
    System`SeriesDump`q_, 
    System`SeriesDump`k_Integer?Positive], {System`SeriesDump`z_, 
    System`SeriesDump`p_, System`SeriesDump`n_Integer}] /; 
  Internal`DependsOnQ[System`SeriesDump`w, System`SeriesDump`z] := 
 Module[{System`SeriesDump`lim, System`SeriesDump`ord, 

   System`SeriesDump`qq, System`SeriesDump`ww}, 
  System`SeriesDump`lim = 
   System`SeriesDump`getExpansionPoint[System`SeriesDump`w, 
    System`SeriesDump`z, 
    System`SeriesDump`p]; (System`SeriesDump`ord = 
     Min[System`SeriesDump`k, 
      System`SeriesDump`AdjustExpansionOrder[System`SeriesDump`w, 
       System`SeriesDump`lim, System`SeriesDump`z, 
       System`SeriesDump`p, System`SeriesDump`n]]; 
    System`SeriesDump`ww = 

     System`Private`InternalSeries[
      System`SeriesDump`w, {System`SeriesDump`z, System`SeriesDump`p, 
       System`SeriesDump`n}]; 
    System`SeriesDump`qq = 
     System`Private`InternalSeries[
      System`SeriesDump`q, {System`SeriesDump`z, System`SeriesDump`p, 
       System`SeriesDump`n}]; 
    1 + Plus @@ 
      Table[(-System`SeriesDump`ww)^
        System`SeriesDump`m System`SeriesDump`qq^

        Binomial[System`SeriesDump`m, 2] QBinomial[
         System`SeriesDump`k, System`SeriesDump`m, 
         System`SeriesDump`qq], {System`SeriesDump`m, 
        System`SeriesDump`ord}]) /; System`SeriesDump`lim === 0];

Protect[QPochhammer];

Now we get the desired behavior,


Series[QPochhammer[q, q, 3], {q, 0, 4}]



Desired result



Warning The seventh definition was modified in later releases probably because someone discovered that it leads to incorrect results in some cases. Proceed with caution.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

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

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