Skip to main content

linear algebra - Efficient algorithm to generate a basis for exact diagonalization


The problem is described as follows:


I need to generate a basis(matrix) in lexicographic order.


For two different basis vector {n1,n2,,nM} and {t1,t2,,tM}, there must exist a certain index 1kM1 such that ni=ti for 1ik1, while nktk. We say {n1,n2,,nM} is superior to {t1,t2,,tM} if nk>tk.


The whole algorithm can be described as follows, supposing n1+n2++nM=N,


Starting from {N,0,0,,0}, supposing nk0 while ni=0 for all k+1iM1, then the next basis vector is {t1,t2,,tM} with



(1) ti=ni, for 1ik1;


(2) tk=nk1;


(3) t(k+1)=N-Sum[ni,{i,1,k}]


(4) ti=0 for ik+2


The generating procedure shall stop at the final vector {0,0,...,0,N}


My code is presented as follows


baseGenerator[M_Integer, N_Integer] :=
NestList[
Block[{k, base},
k = Part[{M}-FirstPosition[Reverse[#[[1 ;; M - 1]]], x_ /; x > 0], 1];

base = #;
base[[k]] = #[[k]] - 1;
base[[k + 1]] = N - Total[#[[1 ;; k]]] + 1;
base[[k + 2 ;; M]] = 0;
base] &,
Join[{N}, ConstantArray[0, M - 1]], (N + M - 1)!/(N!*(M - 1)!) - 1]

Each line corresponds to a specfic step described above. I don't think my code is efficient since it cost much more time than MATLAB writing with loop. Is there any method to improve it a lot ?


In fact, most of the time is costed when calculating position k with command FirstPosisiton.



Answer




Matlab is the fertile soil of bad Mathematica programming... try


baseGenerator2[m_Integer, n_Integer] := 
Reverse@Sort[Join @@ Permutations /@ IntegerPartitions[n, {m}, Range[n, 0, -1]]]

And for your own sanity, don't use uppercase initials on symbols - you may very well clash with built-ins and/or create debugging nightmares (e.g. N is a built-in, by happenstance you did not have an issue there).


Comments

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...

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...

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...