Skip to main content

plotting - Why do I have to put Evaluate[] here


I wanted to draw some contours. I succeeded with this:


W1 = {p, -2, 2, 0.5};
W2 = {p, -10, 10, 1};
P = W1; ContourPlot[
Evaluate[Union[Table[y^2 == 2 p*x, Evaluate[P]],

Table[x^2 == 2 p*y, Evaluate[P]]]], {x, -5, 5}, {y, -5, 5}]
P = W2;
ContourPlot[Evaluate[
Union[Table[y^2 == 2 p*x, Evaluate[ P]],
Table[x^2 == 2 p*y, Evaluate[P]]]], {x, -5, 5}, {y, -5, 5}]

I don't like this solution. I used Evaluate[] a few times and I feel like it is unnecessary although without the function I get errors. Could anyone explain me that. I find the reference unhelpful (maybe that's my lack of language?) "causes expr to be evaluated even if it appears as the argument of a function whose attributes specify that it should be held unevaluated.".



Answer



ContourPlot has the attribute HoldAll. That means that it receives its arguments before they are evaluated. So, if you put as a first argument, something that evaluates to a list but it's not a list, it won't fit with the overloaded version of ContourPlot that expects a list. The same happens with the second argument of Table. Whether they end up not evaluating, using another overload, giving a warning, or simply taking more time than they should, that depends on the particular case at hand


Evaluate is something that makes the containing function behave temporarily as non-holding. Try



SetAttributes[f, HoldAll];
f[x_]:=Hold[x];
f[2+2]
f[Evaluate[2+2]]

If you don't find this neat, what's usually done is use With


With[{P = P},
With[{lists = Union[Table[y^2 == 2 p*x, P], Table[x^2 == 2 p*y, P]]},
ContourPlot[lists, {x, -5, 5}, {y, -5, 5}]
]

]

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.