Skip to main content

front end - TraditionalForm-like typesetting in Jupyter notebook


One of the nice thing about running Mathematica codes in the front-end, is that one can attach custom typesetting rules to the user-defined symbols. Then, setting the format type of new output cells to TraditionalForm provides you with a nice output similar to what one sees in papers and textbooks.


Suppose that someone wants to use my package (that comes with extensive typesetting rules) with the free Wolfram Engine, where the front-end is a Jupyter notebook. As far as I can see, no typesetting is displayed by default.


As a minimal working example, consider the following code.


cf /: MakeBoxes[cf[i_], TraditionalForm] := SubscriptBox["c", i];

SMP /: MakeBoxes[SMP["g_W"], TraditionalForm] := 
  SubscriptBox["g", "W"];
MakeBoxes[myvec[x_], TraditionalForm] := 
  TemplateBox[{OverscriptBox[ToBoxes[x], "\[RightArrow]"]}, "Abs"];
MakeBoxes[Power[myvec[x_], n_], TraditionalForm] := 
  SuperscriptBox[
    TemplateBox[{OverscriptBox[ToBoxes[x], "\[RightArrow]"]}, "Abs"], 
    ToBoxes[n]] /; OddQ[n];
MakeBoxes[Power[myvec[x_], n_], TraditionalForm] := 
  SuperscriptBox[OverscriptBox[ToBoxes[x], "\[RightArrow]"], 

    ToBoxes[n]] /; EvenQ[n];

In Mathematica, for


SMP["g_W"] (cf[1] myvec[v] + cf[2] myvec[v]^2 + cf[3] myvec[v]^3)

I get the expected typesetted output, but in Jupyter this is not the case.


Mathematica output Jupyter output


Is there something that can be tweaked in the notebook configuration or in the package source code, to get the typesetting working?



Answer



I'd just use StandardForm because the loop WE-Jupyter is tricky to hook to.



I guess this solution won't work once WLforJupyter is out of beta stage but anyway:


toOut = toOutImage @* TraditionalForm;
toOut /: (toOut = _) := Null;

It is not a joke :)


enter image description here


Explanation


toOut and toOutImage are symbols that are originally defined within the loop that handles communication between the Kernel and Jupyter notebook. Kernel sends evaluated response but Jupyter does not understand MMA Box language so it needs to be something else. Currently it is implemented that it is either a plain text, an image or an embedded iFrame with contents deployed to cloud.


WLforJupyter loop makes a choice that it should be e.g. an image and does toOut = toOutImage @ evaluationResults


So the trick is to set toOut (1st line) and prevent it from being reset (2nd line). :)



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

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

What is and isn't a valid variable specification for Manipulate?

I have an expression whose terms have arguments (representing subscripts), like this: myExpr = A[0] + V[1,T] I would like to put it inside a Manipulate to see its value as I move around the parameters. (The goal is eventually to plot it wrt one of the variables inside.) However, Mathematica complains when I set V[1,T] as a manipulated variable: Manipulate[Evaluate[myExpr], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, T], 0, 1}] (*Manipulate::vsform: Manipulate argument {V[1,T],0,1} does not have the correct form for a variable specification. >> *) As a workaround, if I get rid of the symbol T inside the argument, it works fine: Manipulate[ Evaluate[myExpr /. T -> 15], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, 15], 0, 1}] Why this behavior? Can anyone point me to the documentation that says what counts as a valid variable? And is there a way to get Manpiulate to accept an expression with a symbolic argument as a variable? Investigations I've done so far: I tried using variableQ from this answer , but it says V[1...
Post a Comment
Read more