I am new to sympy. My ultimate goal is to plot y with respect to x.
Y is the known formula of k, m, ω
and x = ω*(m/k)**0.5 is also known.
I want to know how can I plot a function of both of them.
I am not sure which direction I should proceed from. I have tried simplification, and in the handwritten calculation, M/K of the numerator and denominator should be eliminated, but I have used sympy to only achieve the same variables in the top and bottom, which makes me at a loss. I hope that you can give me a solution.
This is an implicit definition of y and x in terms of parameters omega, k and m. Since omega and x are directly proportional, I would recommend solving for omega in terms of x and then replacing omega in y with that solution. That will give you y as a function of x which you can then plot. Here is a toy example:
>>> from sympy.abc import x, w, k
>>> yi = w
>>> xi = w*k
>>> yx = yi.subs(w. solve(x - xi, w)[0]); yx
x/k
>>> plot(yx.subs(k, 1), ylim=(-1,3))
I want to solve a system of equations with multiple variables.
The solution I'm looking for is in this form y = f(z).
The problem is: sympy won't solve completely my equations.
Here's a small example to illustrate my problem.
x = sympy.symbols("x", real=True)
y = sympy.symbols("y", real=True)
z = sympy.symbols("z", real=True)
eq0 = y - x**2
eq1 = x - z + 4
system = [eq0, eq1]
sympy.solve(system, y)[y]
This code produces y = x^2, which is mathematically correct, but not what I wanted.
What I want to see is my system solved like this y = f(z) therefore (y = (z - 4)^2).
Is there a way to define input and output in sympy's solvers?
Something like this:
sympy.solve(equations, input=z, ouptut=y)
Small note about substitution:
In this naive example, I could substitute the intermediate variable x with z+4 to solve the problem.
That said, I would prefer an alternative solution because, in my real problem, my system has 36 equations and substituting would be difficult.
You need to tell solve the variables to solve for.
eq0 = y - x**2
eq1 = x - z + 4
system = [eq0, eq1]
# solve your system of equation for x, y
solve(system, [x, y], dict=True)[0][y]
# out: (z - 4)^2
Definition of the problem
I am trying to calculate the points of intersection of geometrical objects, such as two planes and a sphere, in python.
Let's consider for example these three objects:
This system gives two solutions:
I would like to know if there is a python library that can help develop a solver to calculate these intersections. I am looking for something working as Wolfram alpha, where we can input three equations and it returns all the possible solutions when there's finite number of solutions for simplicity.
What I tried
I tried with SymPy, but it returns []:
from sympy.solvers import solve
from sympy import Symbol
x = Symbol('x')
y = Symbol('y')
z = Symbol('z')
solve(z, x, x**2 + y**2 + z**2 -1)
I then tried with scipy:
from scipy.optimize import fsolve
def f(x):
y = np.zeros(3)
y[2] = x[2]
y[0] = x[0]
y[1] = x[0] ** 2 + x[1] ** 2+ x[2] ** 2 - 1
return y
x0 = np.array([10, 10, 10])
solution = fsolve(f, x0)
print(solution[0],solution[1],solution[2])
but it only returns one of the two solutions:
6.79746218330325e-28 1.0000000000000002 -2.3528179942097343e-35
I also tried with gekko, and stil it only returns one possible solution (which depends on the initial guess):
from gekko import GEKKO
m = GEKKO()
x = m.Var(value = 1)
y = m.Var(value = 1)
z = m.Var(value = 1)
m.Equation(x == 0)
m.Equation(z == 0)
m.Equation(x**2 + y**2+z**2 ==1)
m.solve()
fsolve from scipy, and all other functions that I personally know of that will accept any form of input function, will return one value.
One workaround if you have an idea where the other solution is would be to give an x0 value that is closer to the second solution with a second call to fsolve (see https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/generated/scipy.optimize.fsolve.html).
If you alternatively know what range you want to try and find solutions in, the easiest way is to make an array that you then check to see where the value changes sign (this would be doing it from scratch)
I found the solution with sympy. Apparently it's one of the only (if not only) libraries that allow finding analytical solutions, and returns more than just one solution. Also, we don't need to pass guesses as initial variables. In my question, there was an error in the example I posted with sympy. This is how I solved the system:
from sympy.solvers import solve
import sympy as sp
x = Symbol('x')
y = Symbol('y')
z = Symbol('z')
sp.solve([z , x, (x**2 + y**2 + z**2) - 1], x,y,z)
Result: [0,-1,0], [0,1,0]
The problem is that I would like to be able to integrate the differential equations starting for each point of the grid at once instead of having to loop over the scipy integrator for each coordinate. (I'm sure there's an easy way)
As background for the code I'm trying to solve the trajectories of a Couette flux alternating the direction of the velocity each certain period, that is a well known dynamical system that produces chaos. I don't think the rest of the code really matters as the part of the integration with scipy and my usage of the meshgrid function of numpy.
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from matplotlib.animation import FuncAnimation, writers
from scipy.integrate import solve_ivp
start_T = 100
L = 1
V = 1
total_run_time = 10*3
grid_points = 10
T_list = np.arange(start_T, 1, -1)
x = np.linspace(0, L, grid_points)
y = np.linspace(0, L, grid_points)
X, Y = np.meshgrid(x, y)
condition = True
totals = np.zeros((start_T, total_run_time, 2))
alphas = np.zeros(start_T)
i = 0
for T in T_list:
alphas[i] = L / (V * T)
solution = np.array([X, Y])
for steps in range(int(total_run_time/T)):
t = steps*T
if condition:
def eq(t, x):
return V * np.sin(2 * np.pi * x[1] / L), 0.0
condition = False
else:
def eq(t, x):
return 0.0, V * np.sin(2 * np.pi * x[1] / L)
condition = True
time_steps = np.arange(t, t + T)
xt = solve_ivp(eq, time_steps, solution)
solution = np.array([xt.y[0], xt.y[1]])
totals[i][t: t + T][0] = solution[0]
totals[i][t: t + T][1] = solution[1]
i += 1
np.save('alphas.npy', alphas)
np.save('totals.npy', totals)
The error given is :
ValueError: y0 must be 1-dimensional.
And it comes from the 'solve_ivp' function of scipy because it doesn't accept the format of the numpy function meshgrid. I know I could run some loops and get over it but I'm assuming there must be a 'good' way to do it using numpy and scipy. I accept advice for the rest of the code too.
Yes, you can do that, in several variants. The question remains if it is advisable.
To implement a generally usable ODE integrator, it needs to be abstracted from the models. Most implementations do that by having the state space a flat-array vector space, some allow a vector space engine to be passed as parameter, so that structured vector spaces can be used. The scipy integrators are not of this type.
So you need to translate the states to flat vectors for the integrator, and back to the structured state for the model.
def encode(X,Y): return np.concatenate([X.flatten(),Y.flatten()])
def decode(U): return U.reshape([2,grid_points,grid_points])
Then you can implement the ODE function as
def eq(t,U):
X,Y = decode(U)
Vec = V * np.sin(2 * np.pi * x[1] / L)
if int(t/T)%2==0:
return encode(Vec, np.zeros(Vec.shape))
else:
return encode(np.zeros(Vec.shape), Vec)
with initial value
U0 = encode(X,Y)
Then this can be directly integrated over the whole time span.
Why this might be not such a good idea: Thinking of each grid point and its trajectory separately, each trajectory has its own sequence of adapted time steps for the given error level. In integrating all simultaneously, the adapted step size is the minimum over all trajectories at the given time. Thus while the individual trajectories might have only short intervals with very small step sizes amid long intervals with sparse time steps, these can overlap in the ensemble to result in very small step sizes everywhere.
If you go beyond the testing stage, switch to a more compiled solver implementation, odeint is a Fortran code with wrappers, so half a solution. JITcode translates to C code and links with the compiled solver behind odeint. Leaving python you get sundials, the diffeq module of julia-lang, or boost::odeint.
TL;DR
I don't think you can "integrate the differential equations starting for each point of the grid at once".
MWE
Please try to provide a MWE to reproduce your problem, like you said : "I don't think the rest of the code really matters", and it makes it harder for people to understand your problem.
Understanding how to talk to the solver
Before answering your question, there are several things that seem to be misunderstood :
by defining time_steps = np.arange(t, t + T) and then calling solve_ivp(eq, time_steps, solution) : the second argument of solve_ivp is the time span you want the solution for, ie, the "start" and "stop" time as a 2-uple. Here your time_steps is 30-long (for the first loop), so I would probably replace it by (t, t+T). Look for t_span in the doc.
from what I understand, it seems like you want to control each iteration of the numerical resolution : that's not how solve_ivp works. More over, I think you want to switch the function "eq" at each iteration. Since you have to pass the "the right hand side" of the equation, you need to wrap this behavior inside a function. It would not work (see right after) but in terms of concept something like this:
def RHS(t, x):
# unwrap your variables, condition is like an additional variable of your problem,
# with a very simple differential equation
x0, x1, condition = x
# compute new results for x0 and x1
if condition:
x0_out, x1_out = V * np.sin(2 * np.pi * x[1] / L), 0.0
else:
x0_out, x1_out = 0.0, V * np.sin(2 * np.pi * x[1] / L)
# compute new result for condition
condition_out = not(condition)
return [x0_out, x1_out, condition_out]
This would not work because the evolution of condition doesn't satisfy some mathematical properties of derivation/continuity. So condition is like a boolean switch that parametrizes the model, we can use global to control the state of this boolean :
condition = True
def RHS_eq(t, y):
global condition
x0, x1 = y
# compute new results for x0 and x1
if condition:
x0_out, x1_out = V * np.sin(2 * np.pi * x1 / L), 0.0
else:
x0_out, x1_out = 0.0, V * np.sin(2 * np.pi * x1 / L)
# update condition
condition = 0 if condition==1 else 1
return [x0_out, x1_out]
finaly, and this is the ValueError you mentionned in your post : you define solution = np.array([X, Y]) which actually is initial condition and supposed to be "y0: array_like, shape (n,)" where n is the number of variable of the problem (in the case of [x0_out, x1_out] that would be 2)
A MWE for a single initial condition
All that being said, lets start with a simple MWE for a single starting point (0.5,0.5), so we have a clear view of how to use the solver :
import numpy as np
from scipy.integrate import solve_ivp
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
# initial conditions for x0, x1, and condition
initial = [0.5, 0.5]
condition = True
# time span
t_span = (0, 100)
# constants
V = 1
L = 1
# define the "model", ie the set of equations of t
def RHS_eq(t, y):
global condition
x0, x1 = y
# compute new results for x0 and x1
if condition:
x0_out, x1_out = V * np.sin(2 * np.pi * x1 / L), 0.0
else:
x0_out, x1_out = 0.0, V * np.sin(2 * np.pi * x1 / L)
# update condition
condition = 0 if condition==1 else 1
return [x0_out, x1_out]
solution = solve_ivp(RHS_eq, # Right Hand Side of the equation(s)
t_span, # time span, a 2-uple
initial, # initial conditions
)
fig, ax = plt.subplots()
ax.plot(solution.t,
solution.y[0],
label="x0")
ax.plot(solution.t,
solution.y[1],
label="x1")
ax.legend()
Final answer
Now, what we want is to do the exact same thing but for various initial conditions, and from what I understand, we can't : again, quoting the doc
y0 : array_like, shape (n,) : Initial state. . The solver's initial condition only allows one starting point vector.
So to answer the initial question : I don't think you can "integrate the differential equations starting for each point of the grid at once".
I have a second order differential equation that I want to solve it in python. The problem is that for one of the variables I don't have the initial condition in 0 but only the value at infinity. Can one tell me what parameters I should provide for scipy.integrate.odeint ? Can it be solved?
Equation:
Theta needs to be found in terms of time. Its first derivative is equal to zero at t=0. theta is not known at t=0 but it goes to zero at sufficiently large time. all the rest is known. As an approximate I can be set to zero, thus removing the second order derivative which should make the problem easier.
This is far from being a full answer, but is posted here on the OP's request.
The method I described in the comment is what is known as a shooting method, that allows converting a boundary value problem into an initial value problem. For convenience, I am going to rename your function theta as y. To solve your equation numerically, you would first turn it into a first order system, using two auxiliary function, z1 = y and z2 = y', and so your current equation
I y'' + g y' + k y = f(y, t)
would be rewitten as the system
z1' = z2
z2' = f(z1, t) - g z2 - k z1
and your boundary conditions are
z1(inf) = 0
z2(0) = 0
So first we set up the function to compute the derivative of your new vectorial function:
def deriv(z, t) :
return np.array([z[1],
f(z[0], t) - g * z[1] - k * z[0]])
If we had a condition z1[0] = a we could solve this numerically between t = 0 and t = 1000, and get the value of y at the last time as something like
def y_at_inf(a) :
return scipy.integrate.odeint(deriv, np.array([a, 0]),
np.linspace(0, 1000, 10000))[0][-1, 0]
So now all we need to know is what value of a makes y = 0 at t = 1000, our poor man's infinity, with
a = scipy.optimize.root(y_at_inf, [1])