i want to solve Abs(x - 3) + Abs(x - 4) == 9,
but python returns me an empty list.
[]
im trying:
sym.solve(sym.Abs(x - 3) + sym.Abs(x - 4) == 0)
where am i wrong?
thanks
The == sign does not do what you want here:
https://docs.sympy.org/latest/tutorial/gotchas.html#equals-signs
Also you'll need to declare x as real for this example.
In [3]: x = Symbol('x', real=True)
In [4]: solve(Eq(Abs(x-3)+Abs(x-4), 9), x)
Out[4]: [-1, 8]
First, please provide a full example.
I do not seem to have any problems... What exactly did you try?
import sympy as sym
from sympy.abc import x, y
sym.solve(sym.Abs(x - 3) + sym.Abs(x - 4) == 0)
Related
I have a question concerning the symbolic simplification of algebraic expressions composed of complex numbers. I have executed the following Python script:
from sympy import *
expr1 = 3*(2 - 11*I)**Rational(1, 3)*(2 + 11*I)**Rational(2, 3)
expr2 = 3*((2 - 11*I)*(2 + 11*I))**Rational(1, 3)*(2 + 11*I)**Rational(1, 3)
print("expr1 = {0}".format(expr1))
print("expr2 = {0}\n".format(expr2))
print("simplify(expr1) = {0}".format(simplify(expr1)))
print("simplify(expr2) = {0}\n".format(simplify(expr2)))
print("expand(expr1) = {0}".format(expand(expr1)))
print("expand(expr2) = {0}\n".format(expand(expr2)))
print("expr1.equals(expr2) = {0}".format(expr1.equals(expr2)))
The output is:
expr1 = 3*(2 - 11*I)**(1/3)*(2 + 11*I)**(2/3)
expr2 = 3*((2 - 11*I)*(2 + 11*I))**(1/3)*(2 + 11*I)**(1/3)
simplify(expr1) = 3*(2 - 11*I)**(1/3)*(2 + 11*I)**(2/3)
simplify(expr2) = 15*(2 + 11*I)**(1/3)
expand(expr1) = 3*(2 - 11*I)**(1/3)*(2 + 11*I)**(2/3)
expand(expr2) = 15*(2 + 11*I)**(1/3)
expr1.equals(expr2) = True
My questions is why the simplifications does not work for expr1 but
works for expr2 thoug the expressions are algebraically equal.
What has to be done to get the same result from simplify for expr1 as for expr2?
Thanks in advance for your replys.
Kind regards
Klaus
You can use the minimal polynomial to place algebraic numbers into a canonical representation:
In [30]: x = symbols('x')
In [31]: p1 = minpoly(expr1, x, polys=True)
In [32]: p2 = minpoly(expr2, x, polys=True)
In [33]: p1
Out[33]: Poly(x**2 - 60*x + 1125, x, domain='QQ')
In [34]: p2
Out[34]: Poly(x**2 - 60*x + 1125, x, domain='QQ')
In [35]: [r for r in p1.all_roots() if p1.same_root(r, expr1)]
Out[35]: [30 + 15⋅ⅈ]
In [36]: [r for r in p2.all_roots() if p2.same_root(r, expr2)]
Out[36]: [30 + 15⋅ⅈ]
This method should work for any two expressions representing algebraic numbers through algebraic operations: either they give the precise same result or they are distinct numbers.
It works (but nominally) for expr1 because when the product in the radical is expanded you get the cube root of 125 which is reported as 5. But SymPy tries to be careful about putting radicals together under a common exponent, an operation that is not generally valid (e.g. root(-1, 3)*root(-1,3) != root(1, 3) because the principle values are used for the roots. But if you want the bases to combine under a common exponent, you can force it to happen with powsimp:
>>> from sympy.abc import x, y
>>> from sympy import powsimp, root, solve, numer, together
>>> powsimp(root(x,3)*root(y,3), force=True)
(x*y)**(1/3)
But that only works if the exponents are the same:
>>> powsimp(root(x,3)*root(y,3)**2, force=True)
x**(1/3)*y**(2/3)
As you saw, equals was able to show that the two expressions were the same. One way this could be done is to solve for root(2 + 11*I, 3) and see if any of the resulting expression are the same:
>>> solve(expr1 - expr2, root(2 + 11*I,3))
[0, 5/(2 - 11*I)**(1/3)]
We can check the non-zero candidate:
>>> numer(together(_[1]-root(2+11*I,3)))
-(2 - 11*I)**(1/3)*(2 + 11*I)**(1/3) + 5
>>> powsimp(_, force=True)
5 - ((2 - 11*I)*(2 + 11*I))**(1/3)
>>> expand(_)
0
So we have shown (with force) that the expression was the same as that for which we solved. (And, as Oscar showed while I was writing this, minpoly is a nice candidate when it works: e.g. minpoly(expr1-expr2) -> x which means expr1 == expr2.)
When I use "x" and "z" as symbols, I have no problem with this code:
from sympy import *
x, z = symbols('x z')
y = -6*x**2 + 2*x*z**0.5 + 50*x - z
solve((diff(y, x), diff(y, z)))
y.subs({x: 5, z: 25})
But when I use "q" and "a", solve does not give me any solution.
q, a = symbols('q a')
y = -6*q**2 + 2*q*a**0.5 + 50*q - a
solve((diff(y, q), diff(y, a)))
y.subs({q: 5, a: 25})
As you can see I use "subs" to check that there is no typo in the objective function.
UPDATE: I used "Symbol" to set each variable individually, but again using "q" and "a" does not work.
# This works
x = Symbol('x')
z = Symbol('z')
y = -6*x**2 + 2*x*z**0.5 + 50*x - z
solve((diff(y, x), diff(y, z)))
# This does not work
q = Symbol('q')
a = Symbol('a')
y = -6*q**2 + 2*q*a**0.5 + 50*q-a
solve((diff(y, q), diff(y, a)))
Thank you.
Got it!
It all depends on an alphabetic order of your variables.
If you substitute x for z and z for x in your first example it will also stop working.
Internally solve sends the expression to the function _solve in sympy.solvers which then tries to solve your equation and fails many times.
Finally as a last effort what it does is it tries to solve -sqrt(a) + q or x - sqrt(z) by picking symbols from it through an internal function _ok_syms, with an argument that sorts those alphabetically (even without this argument it still would, but if wrapped with reversed it magically makes your examples works in the exactly opposite way).
And so it does solve x - sqrt(z) as x: sqrt(z) and -sqrt(a) + q as a: q**2.
While in the first case it ends up with an easily solvable 50 - 10*sqrt(z), in the second case it is lost on -12*q + 2*sqrt(q**2) + 50 as it is not able to simplify sqrt(q**2).
source:
a lot of testing on:
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/blob/master/sympy/solvers/solvers.py
Suppose I have constraints: [x > 2, y > 1, x < 10], and I want to add condition x%4 == 0 when y==1, and get all results, how would I do that in Z3?
I've add blocking constraint for solved result and iterate it to get all possible SAT result, but I found out that it'll simply ignore value y == 1.
Below is the code that I used to test, where it yield no solution.
>>> x, y = Ints('x y')
>>> x = If(y == 1, x%4==0, x)
>>> F = [x > 2, y == 1, x < 10]
>>> solve(F)
no solution
You can use logical implication:
Implies(y == 1, (x % 4) == 0)
This is semantically equivalent to #Axel Kemper's answer, but I believe is more direct logically and doesn't need the else clause. (It also restricts the then branch to be a boolean, providing a bit more type-safety. This is important in a language like Python where everything is dynamically typed.)
What about this?
from z3 import *
x, y = Ints('x y')
s = Solver()
s.add(x > 2, y == 1, x < 10)
s.add(If(y == 1, (x % 4) == 0, True))
print(s.check())
print(s.model())
For y == 1 the constraint is fulfilled, if (x % 4) == 0.
Otherwise, the constraint is fulfilled anyhow.
I'm trying to use z3 to prove the following identity:
x+y == x^y + 2*(x&y)
That is, we can replace any addition with a mixture of boolean and arithmetic instructions (example taken from Chapter 2.2, Hacker's Delight).
I'm using the following z3 python snippet:
from z3 import *
x = BitVec("x", 32)
y = BitVec("y", 32)
lhs = x ^ y + (2*(x&y))
rhs = x + y
s = Solver()
s.add(lhs != rhs)
print s.check()
print s.model()
However, z3 gives me this:
sat
[y = 1509949440, x = 1040187384]
So I suppose I'm somehow using the API incorrectly. Any idea what my error is?
Apparently it is an issue with the precedence of the ^ operator. Using
lhs = (x ^ y) + (2*(x&y))
makes the example work for me.
I have to write a function, s(x) = x * sin(3/x) in python that is capable of taking single values or vectors/arrays, but I'm having a little trouble handling the cases when x is zero (or has an element that's zero). This is what I have so far:
def s(x):
result = zeros(size(x))
for a in range(0,size(x)):
if (x[a] == 0):
result[a] = 0
else:
result[a] = float(x[a] * sin(3.0/x[a]))
return result
Which...doesn't work for x = 0. And it's kinda messy. Even worse, I'm unable to use sympy's integrate function on it, or use it in my own simpson/trapezoidal rule code. Any ideas?
When I use integrate() on this function, I get the following error message: "Symbol" object does not support indexing.
This takes about 30 seconds per integrate call:
import sympy as sp
x = sp.Symbol('x')
int2 = sp.integrate(x*sp.sin(3./x),(x,0.000001,2)).evalf(8)
print int2
int1 = sp.integrate(x*sp.sin(3./x),(x,0,2)).evalf(8)
print int1
The results are:
1.0996940
-4.5*Si(zoo) + 8.1682775
Clearly you want to start the integration from a small positive number to avoid the problem at x = 0.
You can also assign x*sin(3./x) to a variable, e.g.:
s = x*sin(3./x)
int1 = sp.integrate(s, (x, 0.00001, 2))
My original answer using scipy to compute the integral:
import scipy.integrate
import math
def s(x):
if abs(x) < 0.00001:
return 0
else:
return x*math.sin(3.0/x)
s_exact = scipy.integrate.quad(s, 0, 2)
print s_exact
See the scipy docs for more integration options.
If you want to use SymPy's integrate, you need a symbolic function. A wrong value at a point doesn't really matter for integration (at least mathematically), so you shouldn't worry about it.
It seems there is a bug in SymPy that gives an answer in terms of zoo at 0, because it isn't using limit correctly. You'll need to compute the limits manually. For example, the integral from 0 to 1:
In [14]: res = integrate(x*sin(3/x), x)
In [15]: ans = limit(res, x, 1) - limit(res, x, 0)
In [16]: ans
Out[16]:
9⋅π 3⋅cos(3) sin(3) 9⋅Si(3)
- ─── + ──────── + ────── + ───────
4 2 2 2
In [17]: ans.evalf()
Out[17]: -0.164075835450162