gwr
Reputation
2,325
Next privilege 2,500 Rep.
Create tag synonyms
 1d comment Issues with modeling pulses in a very simple system of DAEs I updated the OP to account for the workaround proposed by @MichaelE2 which unfortunately does not seem robust. 1d comment Issues with modeling pulses in a very simple system of DAEs That works for the simple case I gave, but if you try y[0] == x[0], y[t] == x[t] it does not look very reassuring. In a more complex model I am also noting that "EquationSimplification" -> "MassMatrix" unfortunately does not reliably fix the problems with DiracDelta pulses. 1d comment Issues with modeling pulses in a very simple system of DAEs @Quantum_Oli Yes, I indeed noted, that ODEs do not present a problem, but you should be able to model $y(t) = g( x(t), u(t),t)$ as it is done for control system modeling in Mathematica (which internally uses NDSolveafaik?). Using output functions $y(t)$ will work fine for ODE without pulses btw. 1d comment How to write this iterative sequence function in mathematica Will I get paid or will I get credit for doing your homework? So far I can see no effort on your part whatsoever. Apr 22 comment Problem with PlotLabels As a workaround: I note that the problem only arises, when the labels are placed automatically. So Placed[ lbl, pos ] will work, if pos is different from Automatic. In the given example this will work: ListLinePlot[{1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8}, PlotRange -> {All, {5.5, 6}}, PlotLabels -> Placed[1, {0.9, 0.7}]] where the position specs are relative fractions of the plot's region. Apr 20 comment Fast implementation of Metropolis-Hastings update with multiple sets Related: 111224. Apr 19 comment Fitting 6 differential equations to 6 sets of data The 1D case is shown in the documentation ("Applications") for ParametricNDSolveValue; an example for the multivariate case is given in this answer. Apr 18 comment Segmentation fault on auto-complete I can confirm that this solution works with regard to my above comment. My CodeAssistHistory10.4m had a size of 712 MB at the time of deletion. Apr 18 comment Segmentation fault on auto-complete I have just noted a similar behavior on 10.4 (Win 10 Pro), where all text inputs after two characters suddenly stopped as can bee seen in this capture of the problem. Unfortunately I was pointed to this post too late - I am just reinstalling Mathematica... Apr 8 comment Simulating a “Coin Tossing” Game Changed throwing to tossing which next to flipping seems a much more standard name for the game. Apr 4 comment NMaximize/NArgMax complain about nonnumerical value (::nnum) when working with a region This question seems to be a duplicate of 73465. Apr 4 comment NMaximize/NArgMax complain about nonnumerical value (::nnum) when working with a region The problem is indeed 1D regions and not a simple RTFM error. For regions and NArgMax the documentation gives: NArgMax[{f,cons},x∈reg] is effectively equivalent to NArgMax[{f,cons∧x∈reg},x]. Maybe I missed a good example somewhere for 1D? Apr 4 comment NMaximize/NArgMax complain about nonnumerical value (::nnum) when working with a region @ilian you were too quick and I have learned from your comment. :) It still does match your answer but the question is now rather precisely driving at the problem of 1D regions. Apr 4 comment NMaximize/NArgMax complain about nonnumerical value (::nnum) when working with a region I should add that I am using Version 10.4 on Windows 10 Pro (64). Apr 3 comment EvaluationMonitor vs. StepMonitor in Simulated Annealing My understanding is, that EvaluationMonitor will be evaluated whenever the function is evaluated. StepMonitor will be evaluated whenever a point is accepted which here should not necessarily be the best point found so far. I would assume that the best point found so far must be accessed by different means. Mar 31 comment Possible bug with ticks with superscripts, Labeled and Export to PDF It does work correctly on Windows 10 - Mathematica 10.4. Mar 30 comment Why is an empty list not tested by VectorQ? This is a very reasonable and balanced answer, making it an easy accept. Such clarity would nicely become the documentation, which imo here is wanting. Note how And[] and Or[] are "hidden" in examples while a clear design principle is being followed. Mar 30 comment Why is an empty list not tested by VectorQ? All great points and from some algebraic intuition (identity elements for multiplication (and) and addition (or) being different) this might very well make sense. But again: The empty set is not a vector of numbers, so if VectorQ[ expr, NumberQ ] were a test for that property as the documentation states, it must return False. There is precision in language. In other words: The fact that all elements of the empty set are green is a true proposition does not make the empty set a set of green elements. The description in the documentation then is simply false. Or? :) Mar 30 comment Why is an empty list not tested by VectorQ? @JasonB Yes, but then the description in the documentation is utterly misleading because the empty set/list is not a vector of numbers: FreeQ[ {}, e_ /; NumberQ[e] ] (* True *). Mar 24 comment Interesting Progression of ParametricRegion: Bug? @RunnyKine I thought of having the usual Bug label (e.g. introduced in ...) at the top of the post. Will you report the issue(s) -- including the one on the other post -- to WRI?