Skip to main content

pattern matching - Variable scoping problem when mapping over delayed replacement


This is something that got me curious while I was playing around with Mathematica. Consider the following (contrived) example:


Clear[x,y];

{{1, 2}, {3, 4}, {5, 6}} /. {x_, y_} :> {x, #} & /@ {y, y^2, y^3}
(* {{{1, 2}, {3, 4}, {5, 6}}, {{1, 4}, {3, 16}, {5, 36}}, {{1, 8}, {3, 
64}, {5, 216}}} *)

No problems there.


Now suppose y has been defined globally, so


y = 10;
{{1, 2}, {3, 4}, {5, 6}} /. {x_, y_} :> {x, #} & /@ {y, y^2, y^3}
(* {{{1, 10}, {3, 10}, {5, 10}}, {{1, 100}, {3, 100}, {5, 100}}, {{1, 
1000}, {3, 1000}, {5, 1000}}} *)


The problem is that y gets evaluated to 10 before getting mapped to the delayed rule's rhs.


I realised I could do


{{1, 2}, {3, 4}, {5, 6}} /. {x_, y_} :> {x, 
 ReleaseHold[#]} & /@ Thread[Hold[{y, y^2, y^3}]]
(* {{{1, 2}, {3, 4}, {5, 6}}, {{1, 4}, {3, 16}, {5, 36}}, {{1, 8}, {3, 
64}, {5, 216}}} *)

which looks kinda complicated, but works.


So, is there any better way to "shield" the y in the list being mapped over, from the global variable y?



I sort of randomly tried
Module[{y}, {{1, 2}, {3, 4}, {5, 6}} /. {x_, y_} :> {x, #} & /@ {y, y^2, y^3}]


but in this case the temporary variable's name(?) got substituted


(* {{{1, y$119596}, {3, y$119596}, {5, y$119596}}, {{1, y$119596^2}, {3, 
   y$119596^2}, {5, y$119596^2}}, {{1, y$119596^3}, {3, 
   y$119596^3}, {5, y$119596^3}}} *)

Answer



You have already seen that there are a number of ways to skin this cat but I'd like to add some comments of my own.


Other approaches


When possible I prefer to avoid these situations in the first place, instead using something like:



{{1, 2}, {3, 4}, {5, 6}} /. {x_, y_} :> Thread@{x, {y, y^2, y^3}} // Thread


{{{1, 2}, {3, 4}, {5, 6}}, {{1, 4}, {3, 16}, {5, 36}}, {{1, 8}, {3, 64}, {5, 216}}}

Here:



  1. Pattern names x and y remain local

  2. Pattern matching is done only once, rather than three times



You can also avoid interactions with global symbols either by using Block or Formal Symbols. Formal Symbols have the Protected attribute and exist expressly for avoiding Imperial Global entanglements. Block requires foreknowledge of the names of the troublesome symbols, and must be updated any time they are to avoid introducing a bug. Example of Block usage:


Block[{y},
 {{1, 2}, {3, 4}, {5, 6}} /. {x_, y_} :> {x, #} & /@ {y, y^2, y^3}
]


Substitutions inside RuleDelayed


Regarding substitutions into the right-hand side of RuleDelayed there is an important caveat: Mathematica transparently renames variables in nested scoping constructs, including RuleDelayed. Observe:


Cases[Hold[y, y^2, y^3], foo_ :> {x_, y_} :> {x, foo}]



{{x$_, y$_} :> {x$, y}, {x$_, y$_} :> {x$, y^2}, {x$_, y$_} :> {x$, y^3}}

Note that the pattern names on the LHS have changed to x$ and y$ and the RHS does not match. For this reason the best way to make such substitutions is often using a pure function with Slot or SlotSequence (# and ##) parameters which does not cause such renaming to take place. However, pure functions by default will evaluate arguments so you must guard against this. One way is to use Hold and ReleaseHold as you did. Another is to use Unevaluated on each individual argument:


List @@ ({{1, 2}, {3, 4}, {5, 6}} /. {x_, y_} :> {x, #} & /@ 
   Unevaluated /@ Hold[y, y^2, y^3])

You can also use an undocumented syntax of Function that combines the unnamed Slot parameters with the ability to specify function Attributes:


Function[Null, body, attributes]


Null can be implicit, therefore:


Function[, {{1, 2}, {3, 4}, {5, 6}} /. {x_, y_} :> {x, #}, HoldAll] /@ 
  Unevaluated[{y, y^2, y^3}]

Note that in this case Unevaluated is used to prevent evaluation not in our Function (as above), but rather in Map (/@).


It is possible to wrestle Mathematica into making the substitution without renaming as described in the linked answer above, e.g.:


rls = Cases[Hold[y, y^2, y^3], foo_ :> RuleDelayed @@ Hold[{x_, y_}, {x, foo}]]


{{x_, y_} :> {x, y}, {x_, y_} :> {x, y^2}, {x_, y_} :> {x, y^3}}


Combined with the syntax expr /. {{rules1}, {rules2}, {rules3}} to apply multiple rule lists we may write:


{{1, 2}, {3, 4}, {5, 6}} /.
 Cases[Hold[y, y^2, y^3], foo_ :> {RuleDelayed @@ Hold[{x_, y_}, {x, foo}]}]


{{{1, 2}, {3, 4}, {5, 6}}, {{1, 4}, {3, 16}, {5, 36}}, {{1, 8}, {3, 64}, {5, 216}}}

Comments

Post a Comment

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[ ...
Post a Comment
Read more

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?
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
Post a Comment
Read more