Skip to main content

pattern matching - Given a symbolic expression how to find if starts with a minus or not?


I am using a Mathematica function which returns some error term in symbolic form. I needed a way to determine if this term starts with a minus sign or not. There will be only one term. This is to avoid having to worry about Mathematica auto arranging terms like x-h to become -h+x and hence it is not fair to ask for more than one term solution.


Here are some examples of the expressions, all in input form


negativeTruetests = {(-(71/12))*h^2*Derivative[4][f],

(-1)*h^2*Derivative[10][f],
(-(359/3))*h^2*Derivative[10][f], -2*h, -x*h^-2, -1/h*x }

negativeFalseTests = { h^2*Derivative[4][f] , h^2*Derivative[4][f],
33*h^2*Derivative[4][f], h^-2, 1/h}

I need a pattern to check if the expression starts with minus sign or not.


Mathematica graphics



Answer



I will use your test lists alone as reference. If they are incomplete you will need to update the question.



When looking for a pattern for a group of expressions it is helpful to look at their TreeForm:


TreeForm /@ {negativeTruetests (*sic*), negativeFalseTests} // Column

enter image description here


enter image description here


You see that your True expressions always have the head Times with one negative leaf, be it -1, -2 or a Rational that is negative. Your False expressions either have head Times or Power but in the case of Times they do not have a negative leaf. Therefore for these expressions you may use:


p = _. _?Negative;

MatchQ[#, p] & /@ negativeTruetests
MatchQ[#, p] & /@ negativeFalseTests



{True, True, True, True, True, True}


{False, False, False, False, False}



Because of the Optional and OneIdentity(1) this pattern will also handle a negative singlet:


MatchQ[#, p] & /@ {-Pi, 7/22}


{True, False}





Format-level pattern matching


Since it was revealed that this question relates to formatting it may be more appropriate to perform the test in that domain.


I will use a recursive pattern as I did for How to match expressions with a repeating pattern after converting to boxes with ToBoxes:


test = MatchQ[#, RowBox[{"-" | _?#0, __}]] & @ ToBoxes @ # &;

test /@ negativeTruetests
test /@ negativeFalseTests



{True, True, True, True, True, True}


{False, False, False, False, False}



Another approach is to convert to a StandardForm string and use StringMatchQ, which is essentially the same as the test above because StandardForm uses encoded Boxes:


test2 = StringMatchQ[ToString[#, StandardForm], ("\!" | "\(") ... ~~ "-" ~~ __] &;

test2 /@ negativeTruetests
test2 /@ negativeFalseTests



{True, True, True, True, True, True}


{False, False, False, False, False}



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

How to remap graph properties?

Graph objects support both custom properties, which do not have special meanings, and standard properties, which may be used by some functions. When importing from formats such as GraphML, we usually get a result with custom properties. What is the simplest way to remap one property to another, e.g. to remap a custom property to a standard one so it can be used with various functions? Example: Let's get Zachary's karate club network with edge weights and vertex names from here: http://nexus.igraph.org/api/dataset_info?id=1&format=html g = Import[ "http://nexus.igraph.org/api/dataset?id=1&format=GraphML", {"ZIP", "karate.GraphML"}] I can remap "name" to VertexLabels and "weights" to EdgeWeight like this: sp[prop_][g_] := SetProperty[g, prop] g2 = g // sp[EdgeWeight -> (PropertyValue[{g, #}, "weight"] & /@ EdgeList[g])] // sp[VertexLabels -> (# -> PropertyValue[{g, #}, "name"]...
Post a Comment
Read more