Skip to main content

Possible bug involving Dataset/Query and RightComposition


Bug introduced in 10.0.0 and fixed in 10.0.1



Short Version


Why are the results of the following expressions different?


Dataset[{1, 2}][f /* g, z]
Dataset[<|x->1, y->2|>][Values /* f /* g, z]

(*
g[f[{z[1],z[2]}]]

g[f[z[{1,2}]]]
*)

Long Version


Consider the following dataset queries:


Dataset[{1, 2}][f , z]
Dataset[{1, 2}][f /* g, z]
Dataset[{1, 2}][f /* g /* h, z]

(*

f[{z[1],z[2]}]
g[f[{z[1],z[2]}]]
h[g[f[{z[1],z[2]}]]]
*)

The results are as expected, with the ascending operators f, z, etc. being applied from the lowest level outward. But now consider these queries:


Dataset[<|x->1, y->2|>][Values /* f, z]
Dataset[<|x->1, y->2|>][Values /* f /* g, z]
Dataset[<|x->1, y->2|>][Values /* f /* g /*h, z]


(*
f[{z[1],z[2]}]
g[f[z[{1,2}]]]
h[g[z[f[{1,2}]]]]
*)

This time, Values is used to ignore the keys in the assocation. The level 1 query operator is a composition of a descending operator with one or more ascending operators. The documentation has this to say:



When one or more descending operators are composed with one or more ascending operators (e.g. desc /* asc), the descending part will be applied, then subsequent operators will be applied to deeper levels, and lastly the ascending part will be applied to the result.




Yet note how in the second query the level two ascending operator z is no longer applied to the level two elements. Worse still, in the third query the level 2 ascending operator z is being applied after the level 1 ascending operator f.


The operator reordering is most apparent in the "compiled" forms of the queries:


Dataset`CompileQuery[Values /* f, z]
Dataset`CompileQuery[Values /* f /* g, z]
Dataset`CompileQuery[Values /* f /* g /*h, z]

(*
Dataset`WithOverrides@*GeneralUtilities`Checked[Values/*Map[z]/*f,Identity]
Dataset`WithOverrides@*GeneralUtilities`Checked[Values/*f/*Map[z]/*g,Identity]
Dataset`WithOverrides@*GeneralUtilities`Checked[Values/*f/*g/*Map[z]/*h,Identity]

*)

Is this a bug, or a gap in my understanding?


Update


In a comment below, @TaliesinBeynon confirms that this is a bug that will be fixed in v10.0.1.



Answer



Workaround


Even though I cannot explain the behaviour, I note that the level one ascending operators will remain right-composed by means of a level one subquery or by a subsequent query:


Dataset[<|x->1, y->2|>][Values /* Query[f /* g /*h], z]
Dataset[<|x->1, y->2|>][Values, z][f /* g /*h]


(*
h[g[f[{z[1],z[2]}]]]
h[g[f[{z[1],z[2]}]]]
*)

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

mathematical optimization - Minimizing using indices, error: Part::pkspec1: The expression cannot be used as a part specification

I want to use Minimize where the variables to minimize are indices pointing into an array. Here a MWE that hopefully shows what my problem is. vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@ { Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; Minimize[{Total@((vec1[[#]] - vec2[[u[#]]])^2 & /@ Range[1, 3]), cons}, vars, Integers] The error I get: Part::pkspec1: The expression u[1] cannot be used as a part specification. >> Answer Ok, it seems that one can get around Mathematica trying to evaluate vec2[[u[1]]] too early by using the function Indexed[vec2,u[1]] . The working MWE would then look like the following: vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@{ Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; NMinimize[ {Total@((vec1[[#]] - Indexed[vec2, u[#]])^2 & /@ R...
Post a Comment
Read more

functions - Get leading series expansion term?

Given a function f[x] , I would like to have a function leadingSeries that returns just the leading term in the series around x=0 . For example: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x)] x and leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x^3)/4)/(4 + x)] -(1/(16 x^3)) Is there such a function in Mathematica? Or maybe one can implement it efficiently? EDIT I finally went with the following implementation, based on Carl Woll 's answer: lds[ex_,x_]:=( (ex/.x->(x+O[x]^2))/.SeriesData[U_,Z_,L_List,Mi_,Ma_,De_]:>SeriesData[U,Z,{L[[1]]},Mi,Mi+1,De]//Quiet//Normal) The advantage is, that this one also properly works with functions whose leading term is a constant: lds[Exp[x],x] 1 Answer Update 1 Updated to eliminate SeriesData and to not return additional terms Perhaps you could use: leadingSeries[expr_, x_] := Normal[expr /. x->(x+O[x]^2) /. a_List :> Take[a, 1]] Then for your examples: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x), x] leadingSeries[Exp[x], x] leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x...
Post a Comment
Read more

What is and isn't a valid variable specification for Manipulate?

I have an expression whose terms have arguments (representing subscripts), like this: myExpr = A[0] + V[1,T] I would like to put it inside a Manipulate to see its value as I move around the parameters. (The goal is eventually to plot it wrt one of the variables inside.) However, Mathematica complains when I set V[1,T] as a manipulated variable: Manipulate[Evaluate[myExpr], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, T], 0, 1}] (*Manipulate::vsform: Manipulate argument {V[1,T],0,1} does not have the correct form for a variable specification. >> *) As a workaround, if I get rid of the symbol T inside the argument, it works fine: Manipulate[ Evaluate[myExpr /. T -> 15], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, 15], 0, 1}] Why this behavior? Can anyone point me to the documentation that says what counts as a valid variable? And is there a way to get Manpiulate to accept an expression with a symbolic argument as a variable? Investigations I've done so far: I tried using variableQ from this answer , but it says V[1...
Post a Comment
Read more