Tag Info

New answers tagged

0

As Albert Retey notes in a comment, this seems to be a bug specific to version 7 (or perhaps just 7.0.1), given that this behavior is not observed in versions 6.0.2, 8.0.4, 9.0.1 or 10.0.2. Incidentally, you are absolutely right that the file is not exported correctly. If you use a different version to create it as it should be, version 7 will then be able ...


0

I just want to chime in with a confirmation. I've been having this issue since 10.1.0.0 was released. I've emailed Wolfram and gotten no response. But for now i'm solving my problem by simply redownloading 10.0.2 and getting back to work.


1

The option value is ignored because DateListPlot calls Graphics`DateListPlotDump`iDateListPlot which only uses Options for these items: {PlotRange, AxesOrigin, GridLines, GridLinesStyle, Epilog, Prolog, Frame, Axes, Ticks, FrameTicks, DateTicksFormat, DateFunction, DataRange, PlotRangePadding, PlotLegends, PlotStyle, PlotMarkers, Joined, BaseStyle, ...


2

Here's a workaround. Off[Part::partw] GeoListPlot[ ... ] /. Verbatim[Part][___] :> {} On[Part::partw] which strips out the part that is causing the pink boxes. I don't recall what "OriginalInput" is involved in, so strip it out if you absolutely have to.


7

I began this thinking of adding a comment to the answer by bbgodfrey, who points out mathematical fixes to the OP's problem. But each idea led to another test and another idea. Aside from the unceremonious crashing of the kernel, there is more evidence below of a bug or bugs in the parsing of the equations. The fix by bbgodfrey works, it seems, because it ...


6

It appears that NDSolveValue is failing, because too few boundary conditions have been specified. For instance, with a boundary condition at x = 1 and a second boundary condition at t = 0 specified as follows, ans = NDSolveValue[ {-Derivative[0, 2][Φ][x, t] + Derivative[2, 0][Φ][x, t] == Sin[Φ[x, t]], Φ[x, 0] == 0, Derivative[0, 1][Φ][x, 0] ...


0

You may consider this: DateListPlot[{{1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 11}, {5, 8, 9, 6, 2, 4, 7}}, {2013,1,1}, Joined -> True, CoordinatesToolOptions -> {"DisplayFunction" -> (DateString@First@# &)}] Then let's try this: SetOptions[DateListPlot, CoordinatesToolOptions -> {"DisplayFunction" -> (DateString@First@# &)}]; DateListPlot[{{1, 1, ...


0

Version 10.1 gives integral result Integrate[(a + b*Cos[t1 - t2])/(c + d*Cos[t1 - t2]), {t1, 0, 2 \[Pi]},Assumptions -> {a \[Element] Reals, b \[Element] Reals, c >= 0, d <= 0, c + d >= 0, 0 <= t2 <= 2 \[Pi]}]


1

This is not a bug, but an intended design change. The motivation is that TimeSeries is meant for those time-series that support resampling. Zero order interpolation is supported, example: TimeSeries[Range[3], Automatic, ResamplingMethod -> {"Interpolation", InterpolationOrder -> 0}] If your time series is not meant to support resampling then ...


5

This question is being automatically bumped as unanswered. However, we have an authoritative answer in comments: Investigating as a regression. You can put a "bugs" tag on it if you like. --Daniel Lichtblau


1

data = Transpose@{DateRange[Today, DatePlus[{9, "Week"}], "Week"], RandomReal[{25.5, 50.8}, 10]}; Using ToString avoids the problem: DateListPlot[ Function[{pair}, Tooltip[pair, ToString[NumberForm[pair[[2]], {3, 1}]]]] /@ data, Joined -> False, Filling -> Axis] Or, more compactly: DateListPlot[Tooltip[#, ToString[NumberForm[#[[2]], {3, ...


2

I assume it is a bug based on the following findings: In v9.0.1 it does not happen. Adding Evaluated -> False does not fix it. Strangely Evaluated -> True does fix it. As you mention, other plotting functions, such as ParametricPlot3D, do not have this problem, regardless of the Evaluated setting. This is not an answer, just some arguments on why ...


4

Here's a workaround. I'm not sure why the variables s1[t], s2[t] are not reset in my first answer (see edit history). We can take care of things manually by making s1 and s2 numerical functions. Block[{ti = Log@100, tf = Log@(10^9), a0 = 3.05917*^7, b0 = 3.05242*^7, s1, s2, s10 = 1, s20 = 1}, s1[t_?NumericQ] := s10; s2[t_?NumericQ] := s20; {{sol}, ...


1

I trust, you have figured out the response to your "why" question by reading the comments. For your convenience here some very common ways for selecting elements from a list. Cases[{1, 2, 3, 4, 5}, x_?(# > 3 &)] Cases[{1, 2, 3, 4, 5}, x_ /; x > 3] Select[{1, 2, 3, 4, 5}, # > 3 &] (*{4,5}*) Welcome to Mathematica !!!


2

An alternative workaround is using igraph through my IGraphR package. minimum.size.separators gives all possible smallest vertex cuts. Example: << IGraphR` g = CycleGraph[5, VertexLabels -> "Name", VertexSize -> Large] vcs = IGraph["minimum.size.separators"][g] (* {{2., 5.}, {2., 4.}, {3., 5.}, {1., 3.}, {1., 4.}} *) HighlightGraph[g, #] ...


4

This appears to have been a bug that was present in version 10.0, but has been fixed in version 10.1. I can reproduce the behaviour using Mathematica version 10.0.1, but the leak does not occur in versions 7.0.1, 8.0.1, 9.0.1, or 10.1 (all on Win7 64-bit). I initially set $HistoryLength = 0 to remove saved results from consideration. I speculate that ...


14

This is a bug in version 10.1.0. We decided it was serious enough to warrant a fix via an automatic paclet update. The paclet has been pushed live and Mathematica should install it automatically once it does a periodic check with the paclet server. It should take about a week or so. To install it right away, you can do PacletInstall["StringPatternFix"]. You ...


2

To ensure that this does not remain unanswered, this was fixed for 10.1. So, now it returns an FE error, as expected: Fix is confirmed on Mac OS, Windows, and Linux.


1

Observation in Mathematica 10.1: The problem persists (in a way): That bug persists in 10.1: Just try to evaluate the former "Neat Examples"-snippet (which is no longer in the documentation): DynamicModule[{text = ""}, Column[{InputField[Dynamic[text], String, ContinuousAction -> True, FieldHint -> "Enter a string"], Dynamic[Classify["Language", ...


6

Workaround for the two-argument Except in string patterns issue until it is fixed: StringCases["104702", DigitCharacter?(! StringMatchQ[#, "0"] &)] Match the second argument directly, then use PatternTest to check that it also doesn't match the first argument.


2

I believe the main problem with original integration is due to Mathematica try to integrate with a and b being complex numbers. I have some doubts that it's even possible to analytically integrate with complex constants. Integrate[Log[a Cos[x]^2 + b Sin[x]^2], {x, 0, 2 Pi}, Assumptions -> a > 0 && b > 0] (* π (Log[(a b)/16] + 2 Log[(1 + ...


2

fixed in 10.1 (windows): code: Clear[x] Integrate[(1 - x)*(1 + 2*x)^6/Sqrt[1 - x^2], {x, -1, 1}]/Pi


3

fixed in 10.1 (windows): code: StringCases["abcadcacb", "a" ~~ x_ ~~ "c"] StringCases["a" ~~ x_ ~~ "c"]["abcadcacb"]


1

fixed in 10.1 (windows). Now integral remains unevaluated. code: $Assumptions = t \[Element] Reals && t > 0 && t < 1 f[x_] = Abs[Re[Exp[I*x]/(1 - t*Exp[I*x])]] Integrate[f[x], {x, 0, 2 \[Pi]}]


1

Fixed in 10.1 (windows): code dataset = Dataset[{<|"a" -> 1, "b" -> "x", "c" -> {1}|>, <|"a" -> 2, "b" -> "y", "c" -> {2, 3}|>, <|"a" -> 3, "b" -> "z", "c" -> {3}|>, <|"a" -> 4, "b" -> "x", "c" -> {4, 5}|>, <|"a" -> 5, "b" -> "y", "c" -> {5, 6, 7}|>, <|"a" -> 6, "b" ...


1

bug fixed in 10.1 (windows) code ArcLength[Line[{{0, 0}, {1, 0}, {2, 0}}]] ArcLength[Line[{{0}, {1}, {2}}]] ArcLength[Line[{{0, 0}, {1, 0}, {2.0, 0}}]] ArcLength[Line[{{0}, {1}, {2.0}}]]


2

fixed in 10.1 windows code N[Integrate[Sqrt[1 + x^3], {x, -1, 3}]]


1

This has been fixed in 10.1 (windows) code Needs["NDSolve`FEM`"] bmesh = ToBoundaryMesh["Coordinates" -> {{0}, {5}, {10}}, "BoundaryElements" -> {PointElement[List /@ #, #] &@Range@3}] bmesh["Wireframe"["MeshElementMarkerStyle" -> Blue]] mesh = ToElementMesh[bmesh, "RegionMarker" -> {{{2.5}, 1, 0.1}, {{7.5}, 2, 0.2}}] ...


4

Fixed in 10.1 (windows) code MatchQ[{1, 2}, {a_, b_}] MatchQ[{1, 2}, {a_, b_: 0}] MatchQ[{1, 2}, {PatternSequence[a_, b_]}] MatchQ[{1, 2}, {PatternSequence[a_, b_: 0]}]


2

Fixed in 10.1 (windows) code A = SparseArray[{}, {3, 3}]; A[[1, {1, 2, 3, 1, 1}]] += 1


4

This has been fixed in 10.1 (windows) code ClearAll[x] Block[{x}, x::test1 = "message1"]; x::test1 ClearAll[x] Block[{x}, Messages[x] = {HoldPattern[x::test2] :> "message2"}]; x::test2 Block[{x}, x /: x::foo = "bar"; Message[x::foo]]; Messages[x]


1

This has been fixed in 10.1 code Exp[2 I u x] /. Exp[Complex[0, a_] u x] :> a Exp[2 I u Sin[x]] /. Exp[Complex[0, a_] u Sin[x]] :> a foo[2 I u Sin[x]] /. foo[Complex[0, _] u Sin[x]] :> bar foo[2 I u Sin[x]] /. foo[Complex[0, _] (p : u) Sin[x]] :> bar foo[2 I u Sin[x]] /. foo[Complex[0, _] HoldPattern[u] Sin[x]] :> bar


3

fixed in 10.1 code times = {TimeObject[List[0, 14, 55.99`]], TimeObject[List[0, 14, 57.8`]], TimeObject[List[0, 14, 59.09`]], TimeObject[List[0, 14, 59.11`]], TimeObject[List[0, 14, 59.12`]], TimeObject[List[0, 14, 59.14`]], TimeObject[List[0, 14, 59.4`]], TimeObject[List[0, 14, 59.44`]], TimeObject[List[0, 14, 59.45`]], ...


1

This has been fixed in 10.1 code ListPlot[Table[{j, i}, {i, Range[20]}, {j, Range[3]}], Joined -> True, PlotMarkers -> {Automatic, Large}, PlotLegends -> Range[20]]


1

Fixed in 10.1 (windows) code S = {{2, 0.5}, {0.5, 1}}; Covariance[BinormalDistribution[{0, 0}, {Sqrt[2], 1}, 0.5/Sqrt[2]]]; Covariance[MultinormalDistribution[{0, 0}, S]]; Mean[BinormalDistribution[{0, 0}, {Sqrt[2], 1}, 0.5/Sqrt[2]]]; Mean[MultinormalDistribution[{0, 0}, S]]; NExpectation[x*y, {x, y} \[Distributed] BinormalDistribution[{0, 0}, ...


1

This has been fixed in 10.1 on windows: $Version code for the above expr1 = Log[-m^2 - I eta]; Limit[expr1, eta -> 0, Assumptions -> m^2 > 0] expr2 = Log[-m^2 + I eta]; Limit[expr2, eta -> 0, Assumptions -> m^2 > 0] a + expr1; Limit[%, eta -> 0, Assumptions -> m^2 > 0] a + expr2; Limit[%, eta -> 0, Assumptions ...


1

This can easily be fixed by adding the missing BaseStyle -> Graphics`DateListPlotDump`basestyle to Graphics`DateListPlotDump`options So if you either execute the code below before calling DateListPlot or put this into your init.m file, then SetOptions just works. I am sure this will be fixed in the next release (since the fix is so easy). What I ...


2

This bug is fixed in Mathematica 10.1.0. (Mac OS X 10.10.3) DSolve[(x^2 + y^2) D[u[x, y], x] + 5 x y D[u[x, y], y] == 0, u[x, y], {x, y}]// AbsoluteTiming Solve::ifun: Inverse functions are being used by Solve, so some solutions may not be found; use Reduce for complete solution information. >> {0.086166,{{u[x, y] -> C[1][Log[-((4 x^2 - ...


5

Unfortunately, the Mathematica's Copy As > LaTeX command is not (as you'd expect) a command that copies the selected expressions as LaTeX. Instead, it performs additional reformatting that can only be avoided by changing behavior of the relevant built-in function with: System`FEDump`CopyAsTeXMakeBoxes = #& Details Why copied boxes are reformatted ...



Top 50 recent answers are included