Skip to main content

simplifying expressions - Using Hold correctly with Simplify and ComplexityFunction


It seems like Mathematica immediately evaluates the expression Sqrt@I to (-1)^(1/4). I'm trying to use Simplify with my own ComplexityFunction f in such a way, that Simplify[Sqrt@I] returns Sqrt@I, which (in my opinion) is the simpler expression. Hence, I've defined the following f:


Attributes[f]=HoldAll;
f[expr_]:=StringLength@ToString@HoldForm@expr

Testing it yields the expected results:


f[Sqrt@I]
f[(-1)^(1/4)]



7


12



Now, when I call Simplify[Sqrt@I, ComplexityFunction->f] it still returns (-1)^(1/4). I believe this is due to the fact that after the simplification (which should return Sqrt@I), the expression is in turn evaluated to (-1)^(1/4). Can I define f in such a way that this last evaluation is not performed? Can I use HoldForm to achieve this?



Answer



I believe your function works correctly but the automatic transformation functions used by Simplify lack a rule that converts (-1)^(1/4) into Sqrt[I]. Also, your observation that the reverse transformation happens automatically is correct, therefore even with the right transformation function you do not get the result you want. However, you can Hold the expression to prevent this.


Attributes[f] = HoldAll;
f[expr_] := StringLength @ ToString @ HoldForm @ expr


tf = # /. HoldPattern[(-1)^(1/4)] :> Sqrt @ I &;

Simplify[Hold[(-1)^(1/4)], ComplexityFunction -> f, TransformationFunctions -> tf]


Hold[Sqrt[I]]

I used a transformation rule that explicitly performs the replacement you desire. It also operates inside of Hold which the default transformations do not. This isn't particuarly helpful I fear but it does illustrate that with the right ComplexityFunction and TransformationFunctions settings Simplify can perform the operation you want. Crafting those functions may be difficult however.



I took another look at this, and it seems that the custom ComplexityFunction is not needed here. I also found that (-1)^(1/4) may be represented in at least two different internal forms which illustrates the complexity of crafting your own rules. (In practice if any transformations can be done with built-in functions rather than manual pattern matching they should be done that way.)



auto = Replace[#, x_ :> With[{eval = FullSimplify[x]}, eval /; True], -1] &;
tf = # /. HoldPattern[(-1)^(1/4) | (-1)^Rational[1, 4]] :> Sqrt[I] &;

expr = Hold[1/(3 (1 + x)) - (-1 + 2 x)/(6 (1 - x + x^2)) +
            2/(3 (1 + 1/3 (-1 + 2 x)^2)) + (-1)^(1/4)];

Simplify[expr, TransformationFunctions -> {auto, tf}]


Hold[Sqrt[I] + 1/(1 + x^3)]


Notice that in the rule auto I am calling FullSimplify to access the default rules, and I am using the Trott-Strzebonski method for In-Place Evaluation to make these apply inside Hold.


Comments

Post a Comment

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}]
Post a Comment
Read more

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}]
Post a Comment
Read more

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....
Post a Comment
Read more