Skip to main content

dynamic - Localizing variables within a Manipulate


I have a notebook with several examples of very similar computations, each involving the same variable/parameter names of the ingredients used in a final Manipulate. For example,


(* example 1 *)
c = 1;

L = 1;
f[x_] = 180 x^4 (1 - x);
g[x_] = 1;
\[Lambda][n_] = ((n \[Pi])/L)^2;
a[n_] = 2/L Integrate[f[x] Sin[Sqrt[\[Lambda][n]] x], {x, 0, L}];
b[n_] = 2/(L Sqrt[\[Lambda][n]] c) Integrate[g[x] Sin[Sqrt[\[Lambda][n]] x], {x, 0, L}];
u[x_, t_] = Sum[(a[i] Cos[Sqrt[\[Lambda][i]] c t] +
b[i] Sin[Sqrt[\[Lambda][i]] c t]) Sin[Sqrt[\[Lambda][i]] x], {i, 1, 10}];

Manipulate[Plot[u[x, t], {x, 0, L}, PlotStyle -> {Thick, Blue}, PlotRange -> {-15, 15},

AxesLabel -> {x, "u"}], {t, 0, 5}]

followed by


(* example 2 *)
k = .2;
L = 1;
f[x_] = 180 x (1 - x)^4;
\[Lambda][n_] = (((2 n - 1) \[Pi])/(2 L))^2;
b[n_] = 2/L Integrate[f[x] Sin[Sqrt[\[Lambda][n]] x], {x, 0, L}];
u[x_, t_] = Sum[b[i] Sin[Sqrt[\[Lambda][i]] x] Exp[-\[Lambda][i] k t], {i, 1, 10}];


Manipulate[Plot[u[x, t], {x, 0, L}, PlotStyle -> {Thick, Blue}, PlotRange -> {-1, 16},
AxesLabel -> {x, "u"}], {t, 0, 5}]

As discussed in the documentation, evaluating the second block of code dynamically updates the output of the first Manipulate since the underlying quantities being plotted share the name $u(x,t)$ (among other parts) in each.


My question then is, what are some good ways to mitigate this behavior other than:



  1. Choosing distinct names for all underlying quantities for each problem. (This is intractable since I may have 10+ such exercises in each notebook.)

  2. Disabling dynamic updating. (This is unsatisfying since the point here is to see the Manipulate "movies".)

  3. Wrapping everything in a DynamicModule,



e.g.,


(* example 1a *)
DynamicModule[{a, b, c, f, g, L, \[Lambda], u},
c = 1;
L = 1;
f[x_] = 180 x^4 (1 - x);
g[x_] = 1;
\[Lambda][n_] = ((n \[Pi])/L)^2;
a[n_] = 2/L Integrate[f[x] Sin[Sqrt[\[Lambda][n]] x], {x, 0, L}];

b[n_] = 2/(L Sqrt[\[Lambda][n]] c) Integrate[g[x] Sin[Sqrt[\[Lambda][n]] x], {x, 0, L}];
u[x_, t_] = Sum[(a[i] Cos[Sqrt[\[Lambda][i]] c t] +
b[i] Sin[Sqrt[\[Lambda][i]] c t]) Sin[Sqrt[\[Lambda][i]] x], {i, 1, 10}];

Manipulate[Plot[u[x, t], {x, 0, L}, PlotStyle -> {Thick, Blue}, PlotRange -> {-15, 15},
AxesLabel -> {x, "u"}], {t, 0, 5}]]

and then


(* example 2a *)
DynamicModule[{a, b, k, f, L, \[Lambda], u},

k = .2;
L = 1;
f[x_] = 180 x (1 - x)^4;
\[Lambda][n_] = (((2 n - 1) \[Pi])/(2 L))^2;
b[n_] = 2/L Integrate[f[x] Sin[Sqrt[\[Lambda][n]] x], {x, 0, L}];
u[x_, t_] = Sum[b[i] Sin[Sqrt[\[Lambda][i]] x] Exp[-\[Lambda][i] k t], {i, 1, 10}];

Manipulate[Plot[u[x, t], {x, 0, L}, PlotStyle -> {Thick, Blue}, PlotRange -> {-1, 16},
AxesLabel -> {x, "u"}], {t, 0, 5}]]


This at least does what I am after: the variable/parameter names that are recycled across exercises are localized to its respective Manipulate. This just felt a little clunky and requires quite a bit of explanation to students about why we need to do this.


I was curious if there were other/better ways to accomplish this (that I could then share with them).



Answer



In your notebook, do the following:



  • Separate the examples into cell groups. You can use, e.g., Section or Subsection cells to do this.

  • Choose the menu item Evaluation->Notebook's Default Context->Unique to Each Cell Group.

  • Re-evaluate your notebook.


You'll now get the code isolation you're looking for. By using the menu item I point out, you're instructing the FE to automatically create and manage a guaranteed-unique context name for each cell group. You can see the results of this by evaluating $Context in the various cell groups if you're interested in exploring how it works.



Note that, in addition to isolating the context, Mathematica also isolates the line numbering, the history (as accessible by %), and the context path (so a Needs called in one section will not make the package available to other sections or other notebooks).


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.