Skip to main content

graphics - More Ticks::ticks errors in AbsoluteOptions in v10


Bug introduced in 7.0 or earlier and persisting through 11.3




While the specific bug affecting Plot described in AbsoluteOptions prints error messages in V10 has been fixed in 10.0.2 there remain problems with AbsoluteOptions. The first one I note is failure in resolving function-based FrameTicks as used by LogPlot:


LogPlot[x^x, {x, 1, 5}, Frame -> True] // AbsoluteOptions

enter image description here


In the full output the FrameTicks option appears as:


FrameTicks -> {{}, {}, {}, {}}


More errors are seen here:


ReliefPlot[RandomReal[1, {10, 10}]] // AbsoluteOptions

enter image description here


This despite the fact that the plot has no ticks. Automatic also fails, e.g.:


ParametricPlot[r t, {r, 0, 5}, {t, 1, 2}] // AbsoluteOptions

enter image description here





Oleksandr notes in the comments that a similar problem has affected versions 7, 8, and 9 as well, though the issued messages are a bit different. I am therefore updating the header to introduced in 7.0 or earlier.



Answer



This is what I believe the situation to be. AbsoluteOptions uses FullAxes under the hood. It turns out that FullAxes is still expecting Frame/FrameLabel options to be specified using the old Frame -> {b, l, t, r} syntax instead of the new Frame->{{l, r}, {b, t}} syntax. This is why FullAxes issues messages and doesn't work. This means the solution is simply to fix these options before running AbsoluteOptions/FullAxes on the graphic.


(update to fix PlotRange as well)


It turns out that the function PlotRange also has an issue with some "malformed" plot ranges, so I updated the code to handle that as well.


Here is the revised code:


Begin["FullAxesDump`"];

With[{graphic = ListLogPlot[{10, 100}]},
If[Quiet @ TrueQ @ Check[FullAxes @ graphic, True],

Unprotect[FullAxes];
FullAxes[arg_] /; !TrueQ@$FACheck := Block[{$FACheck=True},
FullAxes[fixOptions@arg]
];
Protect[FullAxes];
]
]

With[{graphic = Graphics[{}, GridLines->None, PlotRange->{{0, 1}, {All, All}}]},
If[Quiet @ TrueQ @ Check[PlotRange[graphic], True],

Unprotect[PlotRange];
PlotRange[arg_] /; !TrueQ@$FACheck := Block[{$FACheck=True},
PlotRange[fixOptions[arg]]
];
Protect[PlotRange];
]
]

fixOptions[x_]:=x
fixOptions[(tag:Graphics3D|Graphics)[g_,opts__]] := tag[

g,
Sequence@@ReplaceAll[
{opts},
Rule[h:Frame|FrameTicks|PlotRange,rhs_] :> h->fixRule[h,rhs]
],
Frame->False, Axes->False
]

fixRule[Frame|FrameTicks, {{l_,r_},{b_,t_}}] := {b,l,t,r}
fixRule[Frame|FrameTicks, {d_,s_}] := {d,Automatic,s,Automatic}


fixRule[PlotRange, a_List] := Replace[a, {All, All}->All, {1}]

fixRule[_,rhs_]:=rhs

End[];

Some comments:





  1. I initally used System`Private`NewContextPath and System`Private`RestoreContextPathbecause I had trouble with contexts of my variable names, but that must have been a transient thing related to earlier code.




  2. I only redefine FullAxes if using FullAxes on a ListPlot issues messages. This means that if you want to change the code after running it, you will need to first clear the new FullAxes downvalue that is created by the code. Something along the lines of Unprotect[FullAxes]; Clear[FullAxes]; Protect[FullAxes];




  3. I use the foo /; ! TrueQ@flag := Block[{flag = True}, foo] trick so that the options get tweaked, and then the existing kernel code for foo gets run.




  4. It turns out that Frame -> False needs to get explicitly added to the options so that FullAxes realizes that there really isn't a Frame, and it must process the Ticks/Axes code. Without Frame -> False, the FullAxes code turns Axes -> True into Axes -> {False, False}. Note that options handling uses the first instance of an option, so adding the default (Frame -> False) at the end should not affect output.





I think that's enough explanation. Here is what happens after loading the above code:


AbsoluteOptions[LogPlot[x^x, {x, 1, 5}, Frame -> True], FrameTicks];

AbsoluteOptions[ReliefPlot[RandomReal[1, {10, 10}]]];

AbsoluteOptions[ParametricPlot[r t, {r, 0, 5}, {t, 1, 2}]];

No error messages, although I don't claim that this fixes all cases where AbsoluteOptions issues messages. A similar treatment is possible for FullGraphics



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....