Skip to main content

performance tuning - Alternatives to procedural loops and iterating over lists in Mathematica


While there are some cases where a For loop might be reasonable, it's a general mantra – one I subscribe to myself – that "if you are using a For loop in Mathematica, you are probably doing it wrong". But For and Do loops are familiar to people who already know other programming languages. It is common for new Mathematica users to rely on loop constructs, only to become frustrated with performance or code complexity.



My question is: are there some general rules of thumb that would help new users select the appropriate alternative to a procedural For or Do loop, and are there other useful Mathematica constructs, aside from RandomVariate/Nest/Fold/Inner/Outer/Tuples that they should know about in order to avoid those loops?






In particular, there are a number of ways of iterating over lists:




  1. The For loop:


    For[i = 1, i <= 10, i++, list[[i]] = func[ list[[i]]]


  2. The Table function operating over each part of a list in turn:



    Table[func[ list[[i]] ], {i, Length[list]}]


  3. The Do loop operating over each part of a list in turn:


    lst = {88, 42, 25, 75, 35, 97, 12};
    t = 9;
    Do[
    x = lst[[i]];
    t += Mod[x, t],
    {i, 1, Length[lst]}

    ];
    t


  4. Mapping a function onto each element of a list:


    (3 - #)/(7 * #) & /@ list


  5. And for nested lists, there are constructs like MapThread:


    f = Mod[#, #2] Floor[#3/#] &;


    a = {{18, 85, 22, 20, 39}, {17, 67, 76, 96, 58}, {40, 97, 56, 60, 53}};

    MapThread[f, a]


New users of Mathematica will usually pick options 1 or 3 and use C-style or Matlab approaches that involve the following multistep process:



  1. Defining an empty list

  2. Setting up a loop


  3. Optionally define a variable (usually not localised) to equal the iterator, which is then used in subsequent calculations within the loop

  4. Within each loop iteration, use the local variable defined to equal the iterator to redefine each element of that list in turn according to some function

  5. If the list is multidimensional, nest another loop inside that.


What are some useful guides to help users coming from other languages to Mathematica to improve the conciseness and efficiency of their code by avoiding unnecessary loops?




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.