I am trying to solve an D-equation and do not know y[0], but I know y[x1]=y1.
I want to solve the DSolve only in the relevant xrange x=[x1, infinitny].
How could it work?
Attached the example that does not work
dsolv2 = DSolve[{y'[x] == c*0.5*t12[x, l2]^2 - alpha*y[x], y[twhenrcomesin] == zwhenrcomesin, x >= twhenrcomesin}, y[x], x]
dsolv2 = Flatten[dsolv2]
zsecondphase[x_] = y[x] /. dsolv2[[1]]
I am aware that DSolve does not allow the inequality condition but I put it in to explain you what I am looking for (t12[x,l2] will give me a value only depending on x since l2 is known).
EDIT
t12[j24_, lambda242_] := (cinv1 - cinv2)/(cop2 - cop1 + (h2*lambda242)*E^(p*j24));
cinv1 = 30; cinv2 = 4; cinv3 = 3; h2 = 1.4; h3 = 1.2; alpha = 0.04; z = 50; p = 0.06; cop1 = 0; cop2 = 1; cop3 = 1.3; teta2 = 0.19; teta3 =0.1; co2 = -0.6; z0 = 10;l2 = 0.1;
Your equation is first order and linear, so you can get a very general solution :
generic = DSolve[{y'[x] == f[x] - alpha*y[x], y[x0] == y0}, y[x], x]
Then you can substitute your specific term :
c = 1;
x0 = 1;
y0 = 1;
solution[x_] = generic[[1, 1, 2]] /. {f[x_] -> c*0.5*t12[x, l2]^2}
Plot[solution[x], {x, x0, 100}]
What is wrong with this example?
t12[x_] := Exp[-x .01] Sin[x];
dsolv2 = Chop#DSolve[{y'[x] == c*0.5*t12[x]^2 - alpha*y[x], y[1] == 1}, y[x], x];
Plot[y[x] /. dsolv2[[1]] /. {alpha -> 1, c -> 1}, {x, 1, 100}, PlotRange -> Full]
Edit
Regarding your commentary:
Try using a piecewise function to restrict the domain:
t12[x_] := Piecewise[{{ Exp[-x .01] Sin[x], x >= 1}, {Indeterminate, True}}] ;
dsolv2 = Chop#DSolve[{y'[x] == c*0.5*t12[x]^2 - alpha*y[x], y[1] == 1}, y[x], x];
Plot[y[x] /. dsolv2[[1]] /. {alpha -> 1, c -> 1}, {x, 1, 100}, PlotRange -> Full]
Related
Below code is used to solve a stochastic equation numerically in Mathematica for one particle. I wonder if there is a way to generalize it to the case of more than one particle and average over them. Is there anyone who knows how to do that?
Clear["Global`*"]
{ a = Pi, , b = 2 Pi, l = 5, k = 1};
ic = x#tbegin == 1;
tbegin = 1;
tend = 400;
interval = {1, 25};
lst := NestWhileList[(# + RandomVariate#TruncatedDistribution[interval,
StableDistribution[1, 0.3, 0, 0, 1]]) &, tbegin, # < tend &];
F[t_] := Piecewise[{{k, Or ## #}}, -k] &[# <= t < #2 & ###
Partition[lst, 2]];
eqn := x'[t] == (F#(t)) ;
sol = NDSolveValue[{eqn, ic}, x, {t, tbegin, tend},
MaxSteps -> Infinity];
Plot[sol#t, {t, tbegin, tend}]
First[First[sol]]
Plot[sol'[t], {t, tbegin, tend}]
Plot[F[t], {t, tbegin, tend}]
I am beginner in Mathematica. I write code in mathematica for finding parametric fractal dimension. But it doesn't work. Can someone explain me where I am wrong.
My code is:
delta[0] = 0.001
lambda[0] = 0
div = 0.0009
a = 2
b = 2
terms = 100
fx[0] = NSum[1/n^b, {n, 1, terms}]
fy[0] = 0
For[i = 1, i < 11, i++,
delta[i] = delta[i - 1] + div;
j = 0
While[lambda[j] <= Pi,
j = j + 1;
lambda[j] = lambda[j - 1] + delta[i];
fx[j] = NSum[Cos[n^a*lambda[j]]/n^b, {n, 1, terms}];
fy[j] = NSum[Sin[n^a*lambda[j]]/n^b, {n, 1, terms}];
deltaL[j] = Sqrt[[fx[j] - fx[j - 1]]^2 + [fy[j] - fy[j - 1]]^2];
]
Ldelta[i] = Sum[deltaL[j], {j, 1, 10}];
]
data = Table[{Log[delta[i]], Log[Ldelta[i]]}, {i, 1, 10}]
line = Fit[data, {1, x}, x]
ListPlot[data]
I'm trying to calculate the fourier transform of a gaussian beam. Later I want to ad some modifications to the following example code. With the required stepsize of 1e-6 the calculation with 8 kernel takes 1244s on my workstation. The most consuming part is obviously the generation of uaperture. Has anyone ideas to improve the performance? Why does mathematica not create a packed list from my expression, when I'm having both real and complex values in it?
uin[gx_, gy_, z_] := Module[{w0 = L1[[1]], z0 = L1[[3]], w, R, \[Zeta], k},
w = w0 Sqrt[1 + (z/z0)^2];
R = z (1 + (z0/z)^2);
\[Zeta] = ArcTan[z/z0];
k = 2*Pi/193*^-9;
Developer`ToPackedArray[
ParallelTable[
w0/w Exp[-(x^2 + y^2)/w^2] Exp[-I k/2/R (x^2 + y^2)/2] Exp[-I k z*0 +
I \[Zeta]*0], {x, gx}, {y, gy}]
]
]
AbsoluteTiming[
dx = 1*^-6;
gx = Range[-8*^-3, 8*^-3, dx];
gy = gx;
d = 15*^-3;
uaperture = uin[gx, gy, d];
ufft = dx*dx* Fourier[uaperture];
uout = RotateRight[
Abs[ufft]*dx^2, {Floor[Length[gx]/2], Floor[Length[gx]/2]}];
]
Thanks in advance,
Johannes
You can speed it up by first vectorizing it (uin2), then compiling it (uin3):
In[1]:= L1 = {0.1, 0.2, 0.3};
In[2]:= uin[gx_, gy_, z_] :=
Module[{w0 = L1[[1]], z0 = L1[[3]], w, R, \[Zeta], k},
w = w0 Sqrt[1 + (z/z0)^2];
R = z (1 + (z0/z)^2);
\[Zeta] = ArcTan[z/z0];
k = 2*Pi/193*^-9;
ParallelTable[
w0/w Exp[-(x^2 + y^2)/
w^2] Exp[-I k/2/R (x^2 + y^2)/2] Exp[-I k z*0 +
I \[Zeta]*0], {x, gx}, {y, gy}]
]
In[3]:= uin2[gx_, gy_, z_] :=
Module[{w0 = L1[[1]], z0 = L1[[3]], w, R, \[Zeta], k, x, y},
w = w0 Sqrt[1 + (z/z0)^2];
R = z (1 + (z0/z)^2);
\[Zeta] = ArcTan[z/z0];
k = 2*Pi/193*^-9;
{x, y} = Transpose[Outer[List, gx, gy], {3, 2, 1}];
w0/w Exp[-(x^2 + y^2)/
w^2] Exp[-I k/2/R (x^2 + y^2)/2] Exp[-I k z*0 + I \[Zeta]*0]
]
In[4]:= uin3 =
Compile[{{gx, _Real, 1}, {gy, _Real, 1}, z},
Module[{w0 = L1[[1]], z0 = L1[[3]], w, R, \[Zeta], k, x, y},
w = w0 Sqrt[1 + (z/z0)^2];
R = z (1 + (z0/z)^2);
\[Zeta] = ArcTan[z/z0];
k = 2*Pi/193*^-9;
{x, y} = Transpose[Outer[List, gx, gy], {3, 2, 1}];
w0/w Exp[-(x^2 + y^2)/
w^2] Exp[-I k/2/R (x^2 + y^2)/2] Exp[-I k z*0 + I \[Zeta]*0]
],
CompilationOptions -> {"InlineExternalDefinitions" -> True}
];
In[5]:= dx = 1*^-5;
gx = Range[-8*^-3, 8*^-3, dx];
gy = gx;
d = 15*^-3;
In[9]:= r1 = uin[gx, gy, d]; // AbsoluteTiming
Out[9]= {67.9448862, Null}
In[10]:= r2 = uin2[gx, gy, d]; // AbsoluteTiming
Out[10]= {28.3326206, Null}
In[11]:= r3 = uin3[gx, gy, d]; // AbsoluteTiming
Out[11]= {0.4190239, Null}
We got a ~160x speedup even though this is not running in parallel.
Results are the same:
In[12]:= r1 == r2
Out[12]= True
There's a tiny difference here due to numerical errors:
In[13]:= r2 == r3
Out[13]= False
In[14]:= Max#Abs[r2 - r3]
Out[14]= 5.63627*10^-14
When I was trying to find the maximum value of f using NMaximize, mathematica gave me a error saying
NMaximize::cvdiv: Failed to converge to a solution. The function may be unbounded.
However, if I scale f with a large number, say, 10^5, 10^10, even 10^100, NMaximize works well.
In the two images below, the blue one is f, and the red one is f/10^10.
Here come my questions:
Is scaling a general optimization trick?
Any other robust, general workarounds for the optimizations such
needle-shape functions?
Because the scaling barely changed the shape of the needle-shape of
f, as shown in the two images, how can scaling work here?
thanks :)
Update1: with f included
Clear["Global`*"]
d = 1/100;
mu0 = 4 Pi 10^-7;
kN = 97/100;
r = 0.0005;
Rr = 0.02;
eta = 1.3;
e = 3*10^8;
s0 = 3/100;
smax = 1/100; ks = smax/s0;
fre = 1; tend = 1; T = 1;
s = s0*ks*Sin[2*Pi*fre*t];
u = D[s, t];
umax = N#First[Maximize[u, t]];
(*i=1;xh=0.1;xRp=4.5`;xLc=8.071428571428573`;
i=1;xh=0.1;xRp=4.5;xLc=8.714285714285715;*)
i = 1; xh = 0.1; xRp = 5.5; xLc = 3.571428571428571`;
(*i=1;xh=0.1`;xRp=5.`;xLc=6.785714285714287`;*)
h = xh/100; Rp = xRp/100; Lc = xLc/100;
Afai = Pi ((Rp + h + d)^2 - (Rp + h)^2);
(*Pi (Rp-Hc)^2== Afai*)
Hc = Rp - Sqrt[Afai/Pi];
(*2Pi(Rp+h/2) L/2==Afai*)
L = (2 Afai)/(\[Pi] (h + 2 Rp));
B = (n mu0 i)/(2 h);
(*tx = -3632B+2065934/10 B^2-1784442/10 B^3+50233/10 B^4+230234/10 \
B^5;*)
tx = 54830.3266978739 (1 - E^(-3.14250266080741 B^2.03187556833859));
n = Floor[(kN Lc Hc)/(Pi r^2)] ;
A = Pi*(Rp^2 - Rr^2);
b = 2*Pi*(Rp + h/2);
(* -------------------------------------------------------- *)
Dp0 = 2*tx/h*L;
Q0 = 0;
Q1 = ((1 - 3 (L tx)/(Dp h) + 4 (L^3 tx^3)/(Dp^3 h^3)) Dp h^3)/(
12 eta L) b;
Q = Piecewise[{{Q1, Dp > Dp0}, {Q0, True}}];
Dp = Abs[dp[t]];
ode = u A - A/e ((s0^2 - s^2)/(2 s0 )) dp'[t] == Q*Sign[dp[t]];
sol = First[
NDSolve[{ode, dp[0] == 0}, dp, {t, 0, tend} ,
MaxSteps -> 10^4(*Infinity*), MaxStepFraction -> 1/30]];
Plot[dp''[t] A /. sol, {t, T/4, 3 T/4}, AspectRatio -> 1,
PlotRange -> All]
Plot[dp''[t] A /10^10 /. sol, {t, T/4, 3 T/4}, AspectRatio -> 1,
PlotRange -> All, PlotStyle -> Red]
f = dp''[t] A /. sol;
NMaximize[{f, T/4 <= t <= 3 T/4}, t]
NMaximize[{f/10^5, T/4 <= t <= 3 T/4}, t]
NMaximize[{f/10^5, T/4 <= t <= 3 T/4}, t]
NMaximize[{f/10^10, T/4 <= t <= 3 T/4}, t]
update2: Here comes my real purpose. Actually, I am trying to make the following 3D region plot. But I found it is very time consuming (more than 3 hours), any ideas to speed up this region plot?
Clear["Global`*"]
d = 1/100;
mu0 = 4 Pi 10^-7;
kN = 97/100;
r = 0.0005;
Rr = 0.02;
eta = 1.3;
e = 3*10^8;
s0 = 3/100;
smax = 1/100; ks = smax/s0;
f = 1; tend = 1/f; T = 1/f;
s = s0*ks*Sin[2*Pi*f*t];
u = D[s, t];
umax = N#First[Maximize[u, t]];
du[i_?NumericQ, xh_?NumericQ, xRp_?NumericQ, xLc_?NumericQ] :=
Module[{Afai, Hc, L, B, tx, n, A, b, Dp0, Q0, Q1, Q, Dp, ode, sol,
sF, uF, width, h, Rp, Lc},
h = xh/100; Rp = xRp/100; Lc = xLc/100;
Afai = Pi ((Rp + h + d)^2 - (Rp + h)^2);
Hc = Rp - Sqrt[Afai/Pi];
L = (2 Afai)/(\[Pi] (h + 2 Rp));
B = (n mu0 i)/(2 h);
tx = 54830.3266978739 (1 - E^(-3.14250266080741 B^2.03187556833859));
n = Floor[(kN Lc Hc)/(Pi r^2)] ;
A = Pi*(Rp^2 - Rr^2);
b = 2*Pi*(Rp + h/2);
Dp0 = 2*tx/h*L;
Q0 = 0;
Q1 = ((1 - 3 (L tx)/(Dp h) + 4 (L^3 tx^3)/(Dp^3 h^3)) Dp h^3)/(
12 eta L) b;
Q = Piecewise[{{Q1, Dp > Dp0}, {Q0, True}}];
Dp = Abs[dp[t]];
ode = u A - A/e ((s0^2 - s^2)/(2 s0 )) dp'[t] == Q*Sign[dp[t]];
sol = First[
NDSolve[{ode, dp[0] == 0}, dp, {t, 0, tend} , MaxSteps -> 10^4,
MaxStepFraction -> 1/30]];
sF = ParametricPlot[{s, dp[t] A /. sol}, {t, 0, tend},
AspectRatio -> 1];
uF = ParametricPlot[{u, dp[t] A /. sol}, {t, 0, tend},
AspectRatio -> 1];
tdu = NMaximize[{dp''[t] A /10^8 /. sol, T/4 <= t <= 3 T/4}, {t,
T/4, 3 T/4}, AccuracyGoal -> 6, PrecisionGoal -> 6];
width = Abs[u /. tdu[[2]]];
{uF, width, B}]
RegionPlot3D[
du[1, h, Rp, Lc][[2]] <= umax/6, {h, 0.1, 0.2}, {Rp, 3, 10}, {Lc, 1,
10}, LabelStyle -> Directive[18]]
NMaximize::cvdiv is issued if the optimum improved a couple of orders of magnitude during the optimization process, and the final result is "large" in an absolute sense. (To prevent the message in a case where we go from 10^-6 to 1, for example.)
So yes, scaling the objective function can have an effect on this.
Strictly speaking this message is a warning, and not an error. My experience is that if you see it, there's a good chance that your problem is unbounded for some reason. In any case, this warning is a hint that you might want to double check your system to see if that might be the case.
I'm learning about dynamic programming via the 0-1 knapsack problem.
I'm getting some weird Nulls out from the function part1. Like 3Null, 5Null etc. Why is this?
The code is an implementation of:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EH6h7WA7sDw
I use a matrix to store all the values and keeps, dont know how efficient this is since it is a list of lists(indexing O(1)?).
This is my code:
(* 0-1 Knapsack problem
item = {value, weight}
Constraint is maxweight. Objective is to max value.
Input on the form:
Matrix[{value,weight},
{value,weight},
...
]
*)
lookup[x_, y_, m_] := m[[x, y]];
part1[items_, maxweight_] := {
nbrofitems = Dimensions[items][[1]];
keep = values = Table[0, {j, 0, nbrofitems}, {i, 1, maxweight}];
For[j = 2, j <= nbrofitems + 1, j++,
itemweight = items[[j - 1, 2]];
itemvalue = items[[j - 1, 1]];
For[i = 1, i <= maxweight, i++,
{
x = lookup[j - 1, i, values];
diff = i - itemweight;
If[diff > 0, y = lookup[j - 1, diff, values], y = 0];
If[itemweight <= i ,
{If[x < itemvalue + y,
{values[[j, i]] = itemvalue + y; keep[[j, i]] = 1;},
{values[[j, i]] = x; keep[[j, i]] = 0;}]
},
y(*y eller x?*)]
}
]
]
{values, keep}
}
solvek[keep_, items_, maxweight_] :=
{
(*w=remaining weight in knapsack*)
(*i=current item*)
w = maxweight;
knapsack = {};
nbrofitems = Dimensions[items][[1]];
For[i = nbrofitems, i > 0, i--,
If[keep[[i, w]] == 1, {Append[knapsack, i]; w -= items[[i, 2]];
i -= 1;}, i - 1]];
knapsack
}
Clear[keep, v, a, b, c]
maxweight = 5;
nbrofitems = 3;
a = {5, 3};
b = {3, 2};
c = {4, 1};
items = {a, b, c};
MatrixForm[items]
Print["Results:"]
results = part1[items, 5];
keep = results[[1]];
Print["keep:"];
Print[keep];
Print["------"];
results2 = solvek[keep, items, 5];
MatrixForm[results2]
(*MatrixForm[results[[1]]]
MatrixForm[results[[2]]]*)
{{{0,0,0,0,0},{0,0,5 Null,5 Null,5 Null},{0,3 Null,5 Null,5 Null,8 Null},{4 Null,4 Null,7 Null,9 Null,9 Null}},{{0,0,0,0,0},{0,0,Null,Null,Null},{0,Null,0,0,Null},{Null,Null,Null,Null,Null}}}
While your code gives errors here, the Null problem occurs because For[] returns Null. So add a ; at the end of the outermost For statement in part1 (ie, just before {values,keep}.
As I said though, the code snippet gives errors when I run it.
In case my answer isn't clear, here is how the problem occurs:
(
Do[i, {i, 1, 10}]
3
)
(*3 Null*)
while
(
Do[i, {i, 1, 10}];
3
)
(*3*)
The Null error has been reported by acl. There are more errors though.
Your keep matrix actually contains two matrices. You need to call solvek with the second one: solvek[keep[[2]], items, 5]
Various errors in solvek:
i -= 1 and i - 1 are more than superfluous (the latter one is a coding error anyway). The i-- in the beginning of the For is sufficient. As it is now you're decreasing i twice per iteration.
Append must be AppendTo
keep[[i, w]] == 1 must be keep[[i + 1, w]] == 1 as the keep matrix has one more row than there are items.
Not wrong but superfluous: nbrofitems = Dimensions[items][[1]]; nbrofitems is already globally defined
The code of your second part could look like:
solvek[keep_, items_, maxweight_] :=
Module[{w = maxweight, knapsack = {}, nbrofitems = Dimensions[items][[1]]},
For[i = nbrofitems, i > 0, i--,
If[keep[[i + 1, w]] == 1, AppendTo[knapsack, i]; w -= items[[i, 2]]]
];
knapsack
]