Skip to main content

expression manipulation - Select certain term containing some patterns and confusing pattern Alternatives in FreeQ



I am considering a function termsContain[func_,list_] which select in an expression func the terms containing the ones in the list. The func in general is a sum of some terms and could also be only one term, for example,


in[1]:= termsContain[a + b + c + a x +b y, {x,y}]
out[1]= a x+b y

in[2]:= termsContain[a + b + c + f[a x +c]+b y, {a x}]
out[2]=f[c + a x]

in[3]:= termsContain[a x , {a x}]
out[3]= a x


in[4]:= termsContain[a + b + c + a x[i] y[j] +b x[l] y[m] , {x[_]y[_]}]
out[4]= a x[i] y[j]+b x[l] y[m]

I came up with this :


termsContain[func_, list_] :=  func /. (Longest[u___?(Not[FreeQ[#, Alternatives @@ list]] &)] + v___) :> (Plus[u]);

This works fine for the first three examples, but not for the last one. For the last one, this gives only zero


out[4]=0

Try another example which is also not as expected:



in[5]:=termsContain[a + b + c + a x[i] y[j] +b x[l] y[m] +c f[x[l] y[m]], {x[_]y[_]}]
out[5]= c f[x[l] y[m]]

I thought it should give a x[i] y[j] +b x[l] y[m] +c f[x[l] y[m]]. How to understand these results? I did some experiments, the problem seems to be the FreeQ combined with Alternatives. The Alternatives seems not to take one argument, that is, Alternatives[x[_] y[_]] does not match x[_] y[_] as I thought. See these examples,


in[6]:=FreeQ[a x[i] y[j] +b x[l] y[m], x[_] y[_]]
out[6]= False
in[7]:=FreeQ[a x[i] y[j] +b x[l] y[m], Alternatives[x[_] y[_]]]
out[7]= True

But the out[2] and the out[3] seem to give the correct answer. Why? I am really confused. And how to modify the code to give the expected answer? Thanks!



Appendix: We can test this, for a special case without using Alternatives


   in[8]:= c a[i] x[j] + d f[a[l] x[m]] + f + l +   d a[l] x[n] /. (Longest[u___?(Not[FreeQ[#, a[i_] x[j_]]] &)] + v___) :> (Plus[u])
out[8]= d f[a[l] x[m]] + c a[i] x[j] + d a[l] x[n]

It works here. So the problem really is in Alternatives. FreeQ combined with Alternatives is really confusing, look at these


in[9]:= FreeQ[a x y, a x ]
out[9]= False
in[10]:= FreeQ[a x y, a x | y ]
out[10]= False
in[11]:= FreeQ[a x y, a x | a y ]

out[11]= True

Modify the in[2] a little


in[12]:= termsContain[a + b + c + f[a x y + c] + b x y, { x }]
out[12]= b x y + f[c + a x y]
in[13]:= termsContain[a + b + c + f[a x y + c] + b x y, { a x }]
out[13]=0
in[14]:= termsContain[a + b + c + f[a x y + c] + b x y, { b y }]
out[14]=0


Edit:


At last, I come to this realization,


termsContain[func_, list_] := func /. (Longest[
u___?(Not[And @@ (Through[(FreeQ[#] & /@ list)[#]])] &)] +
v___) :> (Plus[u]);

which is what I want. But I still would like to know how to understand the Alternatives in FreeQ.




Comments

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}]

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 - 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....