Skip to main content

replacement - Pattern matching to a function evaluation inside an Association


I find the following behaviour deeply counter-intuitive:


<|1 -> 123.456 |> /. {x_?NumericQ -> Round[x]}

(* <|1 -> Round[123.456]|> *)

That is, if I make a rule-based replacement of things that sit as values inside an Association object, and I require even a minimal amount of processing on the replacement, then it is just returned unevaluated.



Maybe I'm just completely getting associations wrong, but this is not at all the behaviour I expected. Instead, I would expect this to behave exactly like lists would do in this situation:


{1 -> 123.456} /. {x_?NumericQ -> Round[x]}

(* {1 -> 123} *)

Is this a bug? If not, what causes this behaviour? Is there some clean way to avoid it? I should note that if you copy <|1 -> Round[123.456]|> into a blank cell and run that, it simplifies to <|1 -> 123|>, but passing the result through Evaluate doesn't do the same.


<|1 -> 123.456 |> /. {x_?NumericQ -> Round[x]}
Evaluate[%]

(* <|1 -> Round[123.456]|>

<|1 -> Round[123.456]|> *)

In case this is a bug, I'm running version 11.0.0 for Linux x86 (64-bit) (July 28, 2016), and I observe the same behaviour in version 10.4.1 for Linux x86 (64-bit) (April 11, 2016).



Answer



Association is HoldAllComplete. Once it is created, its parts will then normally be held unevaluated. Use RuleCondition (or other options considered in this question) to force the r.h.s. of the rule to evaluate in-place:


<|1 -> 123.456|> /. {x_?NumericQ :> RuleCondition @ Round[x]}

(* <|1 -> 123|> *)

Note that when you enter



<|1 -> Round[123.456]|>

(* <|1 -> 123|> *)

the Round function gets evaluated inside all right, because the evaluation here is inside a constructor, and it evaluates its arguments before constructing an association. But once it is constructed, no further evaluation can normally happen inside it (unless forced in some way, like e.g. the one I suggested above).


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - Filling between two spheres in SphericalPlot3D

Manipulate[ SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, Mesh -> None, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], {n, 0, 1}] I cant' seem to be able to make a filling between two spheres. I've already tried the obvious Filling -> {1 -> {2}} but Mathematica doesn't seem to like that option. Is there any easy way around this or ... Answer There is no built-in filling in SphericalPlot3D . One option is to use ParametricPlot3D to draw the surfaces between the two shells: Manipulate[ Show[SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], ParametricPlot3D[{ r {Sin[t] Cos[1.5 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[1.5 Pi], Cos[t]}, r {Sin[t] Cos[0 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[0 Pi], Cos[t]}}, {r, 1, 2 - n}, {t, 0, Pi}, PlotStyle -> Yellow, Mesh -> {2, 15}]], {n, 0, 1}]

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]

plotting - Mathematica: 3D plot based on combined 2D graphs

I have several sigmoidal fits to 3 different datasets, with mean fit predictions plus the 95% confidence limits (not symmetrical around the mean) and the actual data. I would now like to show these different 2D plots projected in 3D as in but then using proper perspective. In the link here they give some solutions to combine the plots using isometric perspective, but I would like to use proper 3 point perspective. Any thoughts? Also any way to show the mean points per time point for each series plus or minus the standard error on the mean would be cool too, either using points+vertical bars, or using spheres plus tubes. Below are some test data and the fit function I am using. Note that I am working on a logit(proportion) scale and that the final vertical scale is Log10(percentage). (* some test data *) data = Table[Null, {i, 4}]; data[[1]] = {{1, -5.8}, {2, -5.4}, {3, -0.8}, {4, -0.2}, {5, 4.6}, {1, -6.4}, {2, -5.6}, {3, -0.7}, {4, 0.04}, {5, 1.0}, {1, -6.8}, {2, -4.7}, {3, -1.