Skip to main content

performance tuning - How does Internal`PolynomialFunctionQ work?


I found that Internal`PolynomialFunctionQ performs much better than PolynomialQ.


Here is a huge random polynomial in 12 variables with around 120k terms:



myPoly = Product[(RandomInteger[{-2, 2}] + RandomInteger[{-2, 2}] a + 
RandomInteger[{-6, 6}] b + RandomInteger[{-6, 6}] c +
RandomInteger[{-6, 6}] d + RandomInteger[{-6, 6}] e +
RandomInteger[{-2, 2}] f + RandomInteger[{-1, 1}] g +
RandomInteger[{-6, 6}] h + RandomInteger[{-6, 6}] i +
RandomInteger[{-6, 6}] j + RandomInteger[{-6, 6}] k +
RandomInteger[{-1, 1}] l), {go, 1, 8}] // Expand;

Let's make it not a polynomial in a by replacing the 1000th term with Sin[a]:


myPoly = ReplacePart[myPoly, 1000 -> Sin[a]];


So, now let's see how Internal`PolynomialFunctionQ and PolynomialQ perform:


AbsoluteTiming[Internal`PolynomialFunctionQ[myPoly, a]]
AbsoluteTiming[Internal`PolynomialFunctionQ[myPoly, b]]
AbsoluteTiming[Internal`PolynomialFunctionQ[myPoly, {a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l}]]
AbsoluteTiming[Internal`PolynomialFunctionQ[myPoly, {b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l}]]
(* {0.033989, False} *)
(* {0.032627, True} *)
(* {0.056368, False} *)
(* {0.074603, True} *)


and


AbsoluteTiming[PolynomialQ[myPoly, a]]
AbsoluteTiming[PolynomialQ[myPoly, b]]
AbsoluteTiming[PolynomialQ[myPoly, {a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l}]]
AbsoluteTiming[PolynomialQ[myPoly, {b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l}]]
(* {3.98786, False} *)
(* {4.00939, True} *)
(* {3.222, False} *)
(* {3.32597, True} *)


It seems like Internal`PolynomialFunctionQ performs 100 times better than PolynomialQ when checking for polynomialness in one variable, and about 50 times better for multiple variables.


Is anyone aware of this? Is Internal`PolynomialFunctionQ a low-level version of PolynomialQ?



Answer



First note they are not equivalent:


PolynomialQ[x + x[1], x]
Internal`PolynomialFunctionQ[x + x[1], x]
(*
True
False

*)

Second note that PolynomialQ does a lot of checking:


Trace[
PolynomialQ[x^2 Sin[y], x],
TraceInternal -> True]

Mathematica graphics


If you care to, you can verify that every factor of every term seems to be checked:


With[{e = (a + 2 b + 3 c + 4 y)^2 // Expand},

Trace[
PolynomialQ[e, x],
TraceInternal -> True]
]

What exactly this checking consists of seems to be inaccessible. I've seen Integrate`FakeIntervalElement before, but I don't know what it's for or why it is used here.


On the OP's example, 600,000 expressions are checked, I suppose:


Count[myPoly, a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | i | j | k | l, Infinity]
(* 602194 *)


Probably Internal`PolynomialFunctionQ is meant for a narrower range of use and goes straight to work on determining whether the variables appear only in nonnegative powers, etc.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - How to draw lines between specified dots on ListPlot?

I would like to create a plot where I have unconnected dots and some connected. So far, I have figured out how to draw the dots. My code is the following: ListPlot[{{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4,13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full] I have thought using ListLinePlot command, but I don't know how to specify to the command to draw only selected lines between the dots. Do have any suggestions/hints on how to do that? Thank you. Answer One possibility would be to use Epilog with Line : ListPlot[ {{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4, 13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full, Epilog -> { Line[ ...

dynamic - How can I make a clickable ArrayPlot that returns input?

I would like to create a dynamic ArrayPlot so that the rectangles, when clicked, provide the input. Can I use ArrayPlot for this? Or is there something else I should have to use? Answer ArrayPlot is much more than just a simple array like Grid : it represents a ranged 2D dataset, and its visualization can be finetuned by options like DataReversed and DataRange . These features make it quite complicated to reproduce the same layout and order with Grid . Here I offer AnnotatedArrayPlot which comes in handy when your dataset is more than just a flat 2D array. The dynamic interface allows highlighting individual cells and possibly interacting with them. AnnotatedArrayPlot works the same way as ArrayPlot and accepts the same options plus Enabled , HighlightCoordinates , HighlightStyle and HighlightElementFunction . data = {{Missing["HasSomeMoreData"], GrayLevel[ 1], {RGBColor[0, 1, 1], RGBColor[0, 0, 1], GrayLevel[1]}, RGBColor[0, 1, 0]}, {GrayLevel[0], GrayLevel...

list manipulation - Selecting multiple columns from a matrix?

Sample data: data = { {{2013, 1, 1}, 24.13, 167.67, 231.82}, {{2013, 1, 2}, 32.15, 170.92, 225.99}, {{2013, 1, 3}, 35.43, 172.68, 221.67}, {{2013, 1, 4}, 36.73, 173.05, 218.32}, {{2013, 1, 5}, 58.19, 165.96, 197.05}, {{2013, 1, 6}, 69.99, 163.50, 187.52}, {{2013, 1, 7}, 71.37, 154.21, 175.58}, {{2013, 1, 8}, 72.51, 149.66, 163.25}}; I want a DateListPlot with three graphs, so for a matrix formed by columns 1 and 2, one for columns 1 and 3, and 1 for columns 1 and 4. At the moment I'm using this code: data2 = Transpose[{data[[All, 1]], data[[All, 2]]}]; data3 = Transpose[{data[[All, 1]], data[[All, 3]]}]; data4 = Transpose[{data[[All, 1]], data[[All, 4]]}]; DateListPlot[{data2, data3, data4}, Joined -> True, Filling -> {3 -> {1}}] but I have a hunch that this can be done more efficiently. I don't like the Transpose s in particular. Any ideas? edit (for extra credit) What if I need to multiply the second column by 2, which in my solution is simp...