Skip to main content

numerics - How to make Mathematica try harder to perform symbolic comparisons?


(I suspect this question is a duplicate, but I didn't find a sufficiently similar question with an answer to it.)


I'm having trouble with comparisons of symbolic Reals that are equal, but which Mathematica has trouble recognising them as equal, apparently because it uses N to compare these (apparently after some simple symbolic manipulation). Typically these issues creep up in conditions like one (greatly simplified) below:


x > y /. {x -> Sqrt[(2 - Sqrt[3])^2 + (-3 + 2*Sqrt[3])^2], y -> 4 - 2*Sqrt[3]}


N::meprec: "Internal precision limit $MaxExtraPrecision = 50.` reached while evaluating -4+2\ Sqrt[3]+Sqrt[(2-Sqrt[3])^2+(-3+2 Sqrt[3])^2]."


Sqrt[(2 - Sqrt[3])^2 + (-3 + 2*Sqrt[3])^2] > 4 - 2*Sqrt[3]




This is in no way undocumented feature; it is discussed under Possible Issues section of $MaxExtraPrecision.


What I really want is Mathematica to try a bit harder on solving these (in)equalities numerically in a block of code. How do I accomplish this? As a workaround for specific problem above, this does work (while Simplify on inequality part doesn't):


x > y /. Simplify @ {x -> Sqrt[(2 - Sqrt[3])^2 + (-3 + 2*Sqrt[3])^2], y -> 4 - 2*Sqrt[3]}


False



I would be happy to see a solution that could wrap up around a block of code, and which could possibly work also on non-algebraics that FullSimplify can handle.


EDIT:


To clarify my question: I want first example to evaluate like the expression below, and in general Greater to evaluate for NumericQ argument list similarly inside a code block where I want this feature to be used:



  Simplify[Sqrt[(2 - Sqrt[3])^2 + (-3 + 2*Sqrt[3])^2]] > Simplify[4 - 2*Sqrt[3]]


False




Answer



This solution uses trick to redefine internal functions presented in this earlier answer by Leonid Shifrin.


(* Code run as an argument of WithFullySimplifiedComparisons tries
harder to symbolically resolve equality and inequality tests. *)


ClearAll[WithFullySimplifiedComparisons];
WithFullySimplifiedComparisons =
Module[
{withReplacedFunctions, fullSimplifiedTest, testMappings,
splitInequality, wrapper},

(* Runs code with functions in { old -> new, ... } mappings list
executing new function in place of old, but old definitions
working inside new implementations. *)


SetAttributes[withReplacedFunctions, HoldRest];
withReplacedFunctions[mappings_List, code_] :=
Module[{outer = True},
Internal`InheritedBlock[Evaluate@mappings[[All, 1]],
(Unprotect[#1];
#1[args___] :=
Block[{outer = False}, #2[args]] /; outer;
Protect[#1];) & @@@ mappings;
code]];


(* Returns a version of comparison function fun that attempts to
simplify numeric comparisons in domain dom with FullSimplify. *)

fullySimplifiedTest[fun_, dom_] :=
Module[{test},
test[] := True;
test[_] := True;
test[a_, b_, r___] :=
With[{bn = FullSimplify[b]},
If[fun[0, FullSimplify[bn - a]],

test[bn, r], False, test[a, bn] && test[bn, r]]] /;
NumericQ[a] && NumericQ[b] && (a | b) \[Element] dom;
test[a_, b_, r___] := fun[a, b] && test[b, r];
test];

(* Mappings for normal comparison functions. *)

testMappings =
#1 -> fullySimplifiedTest[##] & @@@
Join[{#, Complexes} & /@ {Equal, Unequal},

{#, Reals} & /@ {Greater, GreaterEqual, Less, LessEqual}];

(* Conversion function from Inequality to chain of simple tests. *)

splitInequality[_] := True;
splitInequality[a_, test_, b_, r___] := test[a, b] && splitInequality[b, r];

(* Actual wrapper to be used.
splitInequality uses new comparison functions. *)


SetAttributes[wrapper, HoldFirst];
wrapper[code_] :=
withReplacedFunctions[testMappings,
withReplacedFunctions[{Inequality -> splitInequality},
code]];

wrapper];

Now earlier problematic tests can run purely symbolically:


WithFullySimplifiedComparisons[

x > y /. {x -> Sqrt[(2 - Sqrt[3])^2 + (-3 + 2*Sqrt[3])^2], y -> 4 - 2*Sqrt[3]}]


False



Comments

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[ ...

equation solving - Invert and fit implicitly defined curve

I need to fit an implicitly defined curve. I thought I could get some data out of Solve , and then using FindFit . Therefore, I would like to find the relation the parametric curve defined by $F(x,y)=0$: Solve[-(1/2) + 1/2 (0.41202 BesselK[0, 0.1 Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]] + (0.101483 x BesselK[1, 0.1 Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]])/Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]) == 0, y] But I can't get an output: Solve was unable to solve the system with inexact coefficients or the system obtained by direct rationalization of inexact numbers present in the system. Since many of the methods used by Solve require exact input, providing Solve with an exact version of the system may help. >> Edit: In particular, I would like to fit the data coming from the curve with the expression of another curve, and not with a function $f(x)$. In particular, since this clearly looks like a cardioid , I would like it to fit to something like it. What other strategies could I try?

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...