Skip to main content

numerical integration - What is the correct way to use NIntegrate inside the FindMinimum function?


I'm having minor issues with the FindMinimum function when using NIntegrate inside. The functions work perfectly well but I get warning messages and I was wondering if maybe I could be enlightened on the correct usage of these two functions together.


For the sake of illustration I provide the full set of functions I used on a simple example.


phi[t_, k_, h_] := (1/h)^3*
Piecewise[{{(h (1 - k) + t)^2 (h (1 + 2 k) - 2 t), (k - 1) h <= t <=

k*h}, {(h (1 + k) - t)^2 (h (1 - 2 k) + 2 t),
k*h <= t <= (k + 1) h}}];
psi[t_, k_, h_] := (1/h)^3*
Piecewise[{{(t - k*h) (h + t - k*h)^2, (k - 1) h <= t <=
k*h}, {(t - k*h) (h - t + k*h)^2, k *h <= t <= (k + 1)*h}}] ;
phipp[t_, k_, h_] := (1/h)^3*
Piecewise[{{2 (h (1 + 2 k) - 2 t) - 8 (h (1 - k) + t), (k - 1) h <=
t <= k*h}, {-8 (h (1 + k) - t) + 2 (h (1 - 2 k) + 2 t),
k*h <= t <= (k + 1) h}}];
psipp[t_, k_, h_] := (1/h)^3*

Piecewise[{{2 (-h k + t) + 4 (h - h k + t), (k - 1) h <= t <=
k*h}, {-4 (h + h k - t) + 2 (-h k + t),
k*h <= t <= (k + 1) h}}];
alpha[t_, k_, h_] := phi[t, k, h] + phipp[t, k, h];
beta[t_, k_, h_] := psi[t, k, h] + psipp[t, k, h];
T = Pi;
n = 2;
h = T/n;
FindMinimum[
NIntegrate[(h*beta[t, 0, h] - h*beta[t, n, h] +

a.Table[alpha[t, i, h], {i, 1, n - 1}] +
b.Table[h*beta[t, i, h], {i, 1, n - 1}])^2, {t, 0,
T}], {{a, {0.76}}, {b, {0.4}}}, Method -> "ConjugateGradient"]

I get the following warning message :


NIntegrate::inumr: "The integrand (a.{(8 Piecewise[{<<2>>},0])/\[Pi]^3+(8 Piecewise[{<<2>>},0])/\[Pi]^3}+b.{1/2\\[Pi]\(8\Power[<<2>>]\Piecewise[<<2>>]+8\Power[<<2>>]\Piecewise[<<2>>])}-1/2\\[Pi]\((8 Piecewise[{{<<2>>},{<<2>>}},0])/\[Pi]^3+(8 Piecewise[{{<<2>>},{<<2>>}},0])/\[Pi]^3)+1/2\\[Pi]\((8 Piecewise[{{<<2>>},{<<2>>}},0])/\[Pi]^3+(8 Piecewise[{{<<2>>},{<<2>>}},0])/\[Pi]^3))^2 has evaluated to non-numerical values for all sampling points in the region with boundaries {{0,3.14159}}"

I ask about this because FindMinimum takes unexpectedly long time to converge to the solution (which is a right one). But I thought that maybe using the functions correctly will accelerate the process.



Answer



The problem is indeed that Mathematica tries to do numerical operations before the symbols have value. You can fix this as follows.



Preliminary definitions, unchanged from yours


phi[t_, k_, h_] := (1/h)^3*
Piecewise[{{(h (1 - k) + t)^2 (h (1 + 2 k) - 2 t), (k - 1) h <=
t <= k*h}, {(h (1 + k) - t)^2 (h (1 - 2 k) + 2 t),
k*h <= t <= (k + 1) h}}];
psi[t_, k_, h_] := (1/h)^3*
Piecewise[{{(t - k*h) (h + t - k*h)^2, (k - 1) h <= t <=
k*h}, {(t - k*h) (h - t + k*h)^2, k*h <= t <= (k + 1)*h}}];
phipp[t_, k_, h_] := (1/h)^3*
Piecewise[{{2 (h (1 + 2 k) - 2 t) - 8 (h (1 - k) + t), (k - 1) h <=

t <= k*h}, {-8 (h (1 + k) - t) + 2 (h (1 - 2 k) + 2 t),
k*h <= t <= (k + 1) h}}];
psipp[t_, k_, h_] := (1/h)^3*
Piecewise[{{2 (-h k + t) + 4 (h - h k + t), (k - 1) h <= t <=
k*h}, {-4 (h + h k - t) + 2 (-h k + t),
k*h <= t <= (k + 1) h}}];
alpha[t_, k_, h_] := phi[t, k, h] + phipp[t, k, h];
beta[t_, k_, h_] := psi[t, k, h] + psipp[t, k, h];
T = Pi;
n = 2;

h = T/n;

Pull the integral out of the FindMinimum and make it only evaluate for numerical lists


Here's the integral, defined so as to only evaluate for numeric lists. This is cumbersome because of the way a is defined (to be a list).


ClearAll[fn];
fn[a_?(VectorQ[#, NumericQ] &), b_?(VectorQ[#, NumericQ] &)] :=
NIntegrate[(h*beta[t, 0, h] - h*beta[t, n, h] +
a.Table[alpha[t, i, h], {i, 1, n - 1}] +
b.Table[h*beta[t, i, h], {i, 1, n - 1}])^2, {t, 0, T}]


And now FindMinimum has no problem:


FindMinimum[fn[a, b], {{a, {0.76}}, {b, {0.4}}}, 
Method -> "ConjugateGradient"]

Mathematica graphics


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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 - 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 - 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.