Skip to main content

calculus and analysis - How can I Integrate large trigonometric expressions more efficiently?


I have a requirement to integrate some large symbolic expressions containing products of trigonometric functions. A single integration is averaging 7 minutes, and I have 2628 expressions to integrate, so it will take 13 days to complete unless I can speed it up.


Here is an example:


expr = c14 (a0+a1 Cos[n x]+a3 Cos[2 n x]+a5 Cos[3 n x]+a7 Cos[4 n x]+a2 Sin[n x]+a4 Sin[2 n x]+a6 Sin[3 n x]+a8 Sin[4 n x]) (e1 Cos[n x]+e3 Cos[2 n x]+e5 Cos[3 n x]+e7 Cos[4 n x]+e2 Sin[n x]+e4 Sin[2 n x]+e6 Sin[3 n x]+e8 Sin[4 n x])+c44 (e1 Cos[n x]+e3 Cos[2 n x]+e5 Cos[3 n x]+e7 Cos[4 n x]+e2 Sin[n x]+e4 Sin[2 n x]+e6 Sin[3 n x]+e8 Sin[4 n x])^2+c66 (j0+j1 Cos[n x]+j3 Cos[2 n x]+j5 Cos[3 n x]+j7 Cos[4 n x]+j2 Sin[n x]+j4 Sin[2 n x]+j6 Sin[3 n x]+j8 Sin[4 n x])^2+c11 (1/2 (h0+h1 Cos[n x]+h3 Cos[2 n x]+h2 Sin[n x]+h4 Sin[2 n x])^2+3/2 (a0+a1 Cos[n x]+a3 Cos[2 n x]+a5 Cos[3 n x]+a7 Cos[4 n x]+a2 Sin[n x]+a4 Sin[2 n x]+a6 Sin[3 n x]+a8 Sin[4 n x])^2+1/2 (d0+d1 Cos[n x]+d3 Cos[2 n x]+d5 Cos[3 n x]+d7 Cos[4 n x]+d2 Sin[n x]+d4 Sin[2 n x]+d6 Sin[3 n x]+d8 Sin[4 n x])^2)+c14 ((b0+b1 Cos[n x]+b3 Cos[2 n x]+b5 Cos[3 n x]+b7 Cos[4 n x]+b2 Sin[n x]+b4 Sin[2 n x]+b6 Sin[3 n x]+b8 Sin[4 n x]) (d0+d1 Cos[n x]+d3 Cos[2 n x]+d5 Cos[3 n x]+d7 Cos[4 n x]+d2 Sin[n x]+d4 Sin[2 n x]+d6 Sin[3 n x]+d8 Sin[4 n x])+2 (a0+a1 Cos[n x]+a3 Cos[2 n x]+a5 Cos[3 n x]+a7 Cos[4 n x]+a2 Sin[n x]+a4 Sin[2 n x]+a6 Sin[3 n x]+a8 Sin[4 n x]) (e1 Cos[n x]+e3 Cos[2 n x]+e5 Cos[3 n x]+e7 Cos[4 n x]+e2 Sin[n x]+e4 Sin[2 n x]+e6 Sin[3 n x]+e8 Sin[4 n x])+(h0+h1 Cos[n x]+h3 Cos[2 n x]+h2 Sin[n x]+h4 Sin[2 n x]) (g0+g1 Cos[n x]+g3 Cos[2 n x]+g5 Cos[3 n x]+g7 Cos[4 n x]+g2 Sin[n x]+g4 Sin[2 n x]+g6 Sin[3 n x]+g8 Sin[4 n x]))+c12 (1/2 (b0+b1 Cos[n x]+b3 Cos[2 n x]+b5 Cos[3 n x]+b7 Cos[4 n x]+b2 Sin[n x]+b4 Sin[2 n x]+b6 Sin[3 n x]+b8 Sin[4 n x])^2+1/2 (e1 Cos[n x]+e3 Cos[2 n x]+e5 Cos[3 n x]+e7 Cos[4 n x]+e2 Sin[n x]+e4 Sin[2 n x]+e6 Sin[3 n x]+e8 Sin[4 n x])^2+1/2 (g0+g1 Cos[n x]+g3 Cos[2 n x]+g5 Cos[3 n x]+g7 Cos[4 n x]+g2 Sin[n x]+g4 Sin[2 n x]+g6 Sin[3 n x]+g8 Sin[4 n x])^2)+c13 (1/2 (c0+c1 Cos[n x]+c3 Cos[2 n x]+c2 Sin[n x]+c4 Sin[2 n x])^2+1/2 (f0+f1 Cos[n x]+f3 Cos[2 n x]+f5 Cos[3 n x]+f7 Cos[4 n x]+f2 Sin[n x]+f4 Sin[2 n x]+f6 Sin[3 n x]+f8 Sin[4 n x])^2+1/2 (j0+j1 Cos[n x]+j3 Cos[2 n x]+j5 Cos[3 n x]+j7 Cos[4 n x]+j2 Sin[n x]+j4 Sin[2 n x]+j6 Sin[3 n x]+j8 Sin[4 n x])^2);


Integrate[expr, {x, 0, 2 Pi}]

n is an integer, if that helps.


How can I compute these integrals more efficiently?


Take case with this example too:


a12 = Cos[n x] (c14 (a0+a1 Cos[n x]+a3 Cos[2 n x]+a5 Cos[3 n x]+a7 Cos[4 n x]+a2 Sin[n x]+a4 Sin[2 n x]+a6 Sin[3 n x]+a8 Sin[4 n x]) (e1 Cos[n x]+e3 Cos[2 n x]+e5 Cos[3 n x]+e7 Cos[4 n x]+e2 Sin[n x]+e4 Sin[2 n x]+e6 Sin[3 n x]+e8 Sin[4 n x])+c44 (e1 Cos[n x]+e3 Cos[2 n x]+e5 Cos[3 n x]+e7 Cos[4 n x]+e2 Sin[n x]+e4 Sin[2 n x]+e6 Sin[3 n x]+e8 Sin[4 n x])^2+c66 (j0+j1 Cos[n x]+j3 Cos[2 n x]+j5 Cos[3 n x]+j7 Cos[4 n x]+j2 Sin[n x]+j4 Sin[2 n x]+j6 Sin[3 n x]+j8 Sin[4 n x])^2+c11 (1/2 (h0+h1 Cos[n x]+h3 Cos[2 n x]+h2 Sin[n x]+h4 Sin[2 n x])^2+3/2 (a0+a1 Cos[n x]+a3 Cos[2 n x]+a5 Cos[3 n x]+a7 Cos[4 n x]+a2 Sin[n x]+a4 Sin[2 n x]+a6 Sin[3 n x]+a8 Sin[4 n x])^2+1/2 (d0+d1 Cos[n x]+d3 Cos[2 n x]+d5 Cos[3 n x]+d7 Cos[4 n x]+d2 Sin[n x]+d4 Sin[2 n x]+d6 Sin[3 n x]+d8 Sin[4 n x])^2)+c14 ((b0+b1 Cos[n x]+b3 Cos[2 n x]+b5 Cos[3 n x]+b7 Cos[4 n x]+b2 Sin[n x]+b4 Sin[2 n x]+b6 Sin[3 n x]+b8 Sin[4 n x]) (d0+d1 Cos[n x]+d3 Cos[2 n x]+d5 Cos[3 n x]+d7 Cos[4 n x]+d2 Sin[n x]+d4 Sin[2 n x]+d6 Sin[3 n x]+d8 Sin[4 n x])+2 (a0+a1 Cos[n x]+a3 Cos[2 n x]+a5 Cos[3 n x]+a7 Cos[4 n x]+a2 Sin[n x]+a4 Sin[2 n x]+a6 Sin[3 n x]+a8 Sin[4 n x]) (e1 Cos[n x]+e3 Cos[2 n x]+e5 Cos[3 n x]+e7 Cos[4 n x]+e2 Sin[n x]+e4 Sin[2 n x]+e6 Sin[3 n x]+e8 Sin[4 n x])+(h0+h1 Cos[n x]+h3 Cos[2 n x]+h2 Sin[n x]+h4 Sin[2 n x]) (g0+g1 Cos[n x]+g3 Cos[2 n x]+g5 Cos[3 n x]+g7 Cos[4 n x]+g2 Sin[n x]+g4 Sin[2 n x]+g6 Sin[3 n x]+g8 Sin[4 n x]))+c12 (1/2 (b0+b1 Cos[n x]+b3 Cos[2 n x]+b5 Cos[3 n x]+b7 Cos[4 n x]+b2 Sin[n x]+b4 Sin[2 n x]+b6 Sin[3 n x]+b8 Sin[4 n x])^2+1/2 (e1 Cos[n x]+e3 Cos[2 n x]+e5 Cos[3 n x]+e7 Cos[4 n x]+e2 Sin[n x]+e4 Sin[2 n x]+e6 Sin[3 n x]+e8 Sin[4 n x])^2+1/2 (g0+g1 Cos[n x]+g3 Cos[2 n x]+g5 Cos[3 n x]+g7 Cos[4 n x]+g2 Sin[n x]+g4 Sin[2 n x]+g6 Sin[3 n x]+g8 Sin[4 n x])^2)+c13 (1/2 (c0+c1 Cos[n x]+c3 Cos[2 n x]+c2 Sin[n x]+c4 Sin[2 n x])^2+1/2 (f0+f1 Cos[n x]+f3 Cos[2 n x]+f5 Cos[3 n x]+f7 Cos[4 n x]+f2 Sin[n x]+f4 Sin[2 n x]+f6 Sin[3 n x]+f8 Sin[4 n x])^2+1/2 (j0+j1 Cos[n x]+j3 Cos[2 n x]+j5 Cos[3 n x]+j7 Cos[4 n x]+j2 Sin[n x]+j4 Sin[2 n x]+j6 Sin[3 n x]+j8 Sin[4 n x])^2))

Answer



Your integrand(s), when expanded, consist of terms that are constants times zero, one or two factors of sine or cosine. The terms can be integrated symbolically and stored as rules. It will be convenient to find the average value and multiply by 2 Pi at the end. (This will automatically handle constant terms without a special rule.) Thanks to Simon Woods for a much simplified set of rules.


Clear[a, b];

iRules = {(Cos | Sin)[_]^2 -> 1/2, (Cos | Sin)[_] -> 0};

ia11 = 2 Pi Expand[a11] /. iRules; // AbsoluteTiming
(*  {0.010274, Null}  *)

It's a lot faster:


evalRules = {   (* assumes  n  is an  Integer *)
  Cos[(a_Integer: 1) n Pi] :> (-1)^a,
  Sin[(b_Integer: 1) n Pi] :> 0
  };

ja11 = Integrate[a11, {x, 0, 2 Pi}] /. evalRules; // AbsoluteTiming
(*  {177.270803, Null}  *)

And it gives the same result, provided the assumptions inherent in evalRules are correct:


ia11 == Expand[ja11] // Simplify
(*  True  *)


Update: Here's another way, about 20 times slower than iRules, but 1000 times faster than Integrate. It's a similar idea, but it should work on general products of sines and cosines. It assumes that sines and cosines are the only functions in the integrands.


ka11 = 2 Pi Expand[TrigToExp@a11] /. E^_ -> 0; // AbsoluteTiming

(*  {0.205734, Null}  *)

ka11 == Expand[ja11 /. evalRules] // Simplify
(*  True  *)

Or, sparked by a comment by the OP, more complicated combinations of sines and cosines can be fairly quickly simplified with TrigReduce.


2 Pi TrigReduce[a11] /. iRules; // AbsoluteTiming
(*  {0.086483, Null}  *)



Original rules


iRules =(*Dispatch@*)
 {Cos[(a_Integer: 1) n x] Sin[(a_Integer: 1) n x] ->
   Integrate[Cos[a n x] Sin[a n x], {x, 0, 2 Pi}]/(2 Pi),
  Cos[(a_Integer: 1) n x] Sin[(b_Integer: 1) n x] /; a == -b -> 
   Integrate[Cos[a n x] Sin[-a n x], {x, 0, 2 Pi}]/(2 Pi),
  Cos[(a_Integer: 1) n x] Sin[(b_Integer: 1) n x] -> 
   Integrate[Cos[a n x] Sin[b n x], {x, 0, 2 Pi}]/(2 Pi),
  Sin[(a_Integer: 1) n x] Sin[(b_Integer: 1) n x] -> 
   Integrate[Cos[a n x] Sin[b n x], {x, 0, 2 Pi}]/(2 Pi),

  Cos[(a_Integer: 1) n x] Cos[(b_Integer: 1) n x] -> 
   Integrate[Cos[a n x] Sin[b n x], {x, 0, 2 Pi}]/(2 Pi),
  Cos[(a_Integer: 1) n x]^2 -> 
   Integrate[Cos[a n x]^2, {x, 0, 2 Pi}]/(2 Pi),
  Sin[(b_Integer: 1) n x]^2 -> 
   Integrate[Sin[b n x]^2, {x, 0, 2 Pi}]/(2 Pi),
  Cos[(a_Integer: 1) n x] -> 
   Integrate[Cos[a n x], {x, 0, 2 Pi}]/(2 Pi),
  Sin[(b_Integer: 1) n x] -> 
   Integrate[Sin[b n x], {x, 0, 2 Pi}]/(2 Pi)};


Some remarks on the code: Note that the rule in iRules are Rule (->) not RuleDelayed (:>). This means that the integrals will be performed when iRules are defined instead of delayed until the application of iRules. Therefore the pattern symbols a and b must be cleared of any values. If that is not possible, then use other symbols or put in a Module (Module[{a, b}, iRules = {...}]).


Dispatch did not speed things up for me. That may change if the list of integration rules were to grow much larger.


Comments

Post a Comment

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[ ...
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

functions - What best practices or performance considerations are there for choosing between Cases, Position, Pick and Select?

Cases , Select , Pick and Position each have different syntaxes and purposes, but there are times when you can express the same calculation equivalently using either of them. So with this input: test = RandomInteger[{-25, 25}, {20, 2}] {{-15, 13}, {-8, 16}, {-8, -19}, {7, 6}, {-21, 9}, {-3, -25}, {21, -18}, {4, 4}, {2, -2}, {-24, 8}, {-17, -8}, {4, -18}, {22, -24}, {-4, -3}, {21, 0}, {19, 18}, {-23, -8}, {23, -25}, {14, -2}, {-1, -13}} You can get the following equivalent results: Cases[test, {_, _?Positive}] {{-15, 13}, {-8, 16}, {7, 6}, {-21, 9}, {4, 4}, {-24, 8}, {19, 18}} Select[test, #[[2]] > 0 &] {{-15, 13}, {-8, 16}, {7, 6}, {-21, 9}, {4, 4}, {-24, 8}, {19, 18}} Pick[test, Sign[test[[All, 2]] ], 1] {{-15, 13}, {-8, 16}, {7, 6}, {-21, 9}, {4, 4}, {-24, 8}, {19, 18}} test[[Flatten@Position[test[[All, 2]], _?Positive] ]] {{-15, 13}, {-8, 16}, {7, 6}, {-21, 9}, {4, 4}, {-24, 8}, {19, 18}} Are there performance or other considerations that should guide which you shou...
Post a Comment
Read more