Skip to main content

list manipulation - Using Position (which requires a pattern) in the same manner as Select (which requires a criterion)


I am using Mathematica7. I have a list of lists (creatively named list in the following sample code) containing data. I would like to find the positions of the elements that satisfy a particular criterion. However, Position takes a pattern as input, whereas Select takes a criterion as input.


Suppose I want to find the positions of all lists (i.e., sublists) whose first element is 1. The following code works (or so it seems), but it generates error messages as well:


list = {{1, "A"}, {1, "B"}, {2, "C"}};
Position[list, _?(#[[1]] == 1 &)]

The output looks correct: {{1},{2}}



But I also get the following error messages, which in a long computation seem to slow down Position:



Part::partd : Part specification List[[1]] is longer than depth of object.
Part::partd : Part specification List[[1]] is longer than depth of object.
Part::partd : Part specification [[1]][[1]] is longer than depth of object.
General::stop : Further output of Part::partd will be suppressed during this calculation.

Does my code indeed work properly? If so, why do I get the error messages? If not, how can I improve my code?



Answer



To understand why you're getting that error, try your code with _ as the pattern and see what elements are returned:



list[[Sequence @@ #]] & /@ Position[list, _]
(* {List, List, 1, "A", {1, "A"}, List, 1, "B", {1, "B"}, List, 2, "C", {2, "C"},
{{1, "A"}, {1, "B"}, {2, "C"}}} *)

You can see that in your case, Position is walking down every branch and visiting every leaf of the expression tree and checking to see if the criterion fits. You can confirm that these results are indeed the leaves:


Level[list, -1, Heads -> True]
(* {List, List, 1, "A", {1, "A"}, List, 1, "B", {1, "B"}, List, 2, "C", {2, "C"}} *)

The last element is the entire expression itself. None of the elements in the above list except for elements of the original list have parts that are indexable as you've done in your pattern, which is why you get the error.


Once you understand this, you can now proceed to fix the errors and narrow down where position acts, namely:




  • set Heads -> False so that you don't visit them

  • look only at level 1 and not deeper/shallower levels

  • narrow down the pattern to something more suitable (hint: you know the first element should be 1)


If you do these, you'll reach your desired solution (which Rojo and kguler have already answered). So going by the points above, you'd do something like,


Position[list, _?(First[#] == 1 &), {1}, Heads -> False]
(* {{1}, {2}} *)

which is the same as Rojo's answer. Now the pattern can be refined further and not require either the use of Heads -> False or the level {1}, and this leads you to kguler's answer:



Position[list, {1, ___}]
(* {{1}, {2}} *)

With experience, you'll recognize how to simplify and choose the right pattern. Note that in more complicated cases, you might have to operate at different levels or only at certain specific levels, etc., and you might have to specify the pattern and the level.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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 - 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 - 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....