Skip to main content

programming - How to define the Bernstein function like the built-in BernsteinBasis?


We know the Bernstein function defined as below:


Bn,i(u)=(ni)ui(1−u)n−i


And we define Bn,i(u)=0 when i<0 or i>n


In addition, the first derivative of Bn,i(u) has the below relationship:


B′n,i(u)=n[Bn−1,i−1(u)−Bn−1,i(u)]



So I can utilize this equation to calculate the derivative of order k


B(k)n,i(u)=n(n−1)⋯(n−k+1)[{Bn−k,i−k(u),⋯,Bn−k,i(u)}.coefficient]


Here,coefficient has the style (1,-3,3,1),(1, -4, 6, -4, 1),etc


Implementation


Bernstein[n_, i_, u_] /; i < 0 || i > n := 0
Bernstein[0, 0, u_] := 1
Bernstein[n_, i_, u_?NumericQ] := Binomial[n, i] u^i (1 - u)^(n - i)

The derivative of Bernstein


D[Bernstein[n_, i_, u_], {u_, k_}] ^:=

 Module[{coeff, body},
  coeff = Times @@ Array[n - # &, k, 0];
  body =
   Array[Bernstein[n - k, #, u] &, k + 1, i - k].
    CoefficientList[(1 - u)^k, u];
  coeff* body
]
(*=======================================*)
D[Bernstein[n_, i_, u_], u_] ^:= D[Bernstein[n, i, u], {u, 1}]


However, the Mathematica give me the warining information



enter image description here



Expand the expression


PiecewiseExpand[expr_] ^:=
 expr /. Bernstein[n_, i_, u_Symbol] :> 
  Binomial[n, i] u^i (1 - u)^(n - i)



enter image description here




Tesing


Successful case


Bernstein[3, 2, .4](*0.288*)

D[Bernstein[3, 2, u], u]



3 (Bernstein[2, 1, u] - Bernstein[2, 2, u])

D[Bernstein[3, 2, u], {u, 2}]


6 (Bernstein[1, 0, u] - 2 Bernstein[1, 1, u])

Failture


D[Bernstein[3, 2, u], u] // PiecewiseExpand



no expantion >_<



Question



  • How to fix the warining information about UpSetDelayed?

  • Is it possible to implement the derivative of Bn,i(u) by rule-based solution? I have a trial, but failed.



My trial



D[Berns[n_, i_, u_], {u_, k_}] ^:=
 Do[
  Bernstein[n, i, u] /.
   Bernstein[x_, y_, z_] :> 
    x (Bernstein[x - 1, y - 1, u] - Bernstein[x - 1, y, z]), {k}]
 (*failture*)

Built-in function


D[BernsteinBasis[6, 3, u], {u, 3}]



enter image description here



Obviously, the Mathematica utilizes a recursive method by observing the result.




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

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

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