Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
  • 18:24
    codecov[bot] commented #18410
  • 17:46
    czgdp1807 commented #3663
  • 17:43
    codecov[bot] commented #18342
  • 17:32
    sylee957 labeled #18411
  • 17:32
    sylee957 opened #18411
  • 17:09
    sympy-bot commented #18410
  • 17:09
    Mohitbalwani26 opened #18410
  • 17:02
    smichr commented #12280
  • 16:37
    codecov[bot] commented #18342
  • 16:37
    Pristine-Cat synchronize #18342
  • 16:11
    Smit-create commented #18380
  • 16:10
    sympy-bot commented #18390
  • 16:10
    Smit-create edited #18390
  • 16:09
    sympy-bot commented #18390
  • 16:09
    Smit-create edited #18390
  • 16:08
    COOLIRON2311 commented #18378
  • 15:54
    codecov[bot] commented #18409
  • 15:50
    Pristine-Cat synchronize #18342
  • 15:40
    codecov[bot] commented #18390
  • 15:19
    Pristine-Cat commented #18342
Ashwin Shenoy
@Ashwin-Shenoy-NITK
Is it something regarding SSH Keys ?
I have configured remote with git remote -v & git remote add upstream git@github.com:sympy/sympy.git & there eas no errors.
V Gladkova
@valglad
It could be to do with ssh keys. You could check if your key is setup properly as described here
Ravi charan
@RavicharanN

@Ashwin-Shenoy-NITK How exactly are you specifying the upstream?

'Coz git remote add upstream git@github.com:sympy/sympy.git might throw that error as you don't own the repository and you won't have the access rights.

If that is the case, you could simply use git remote add upstream https://github.com/sympy/sympy there.

Igor Morgado
@igormorgado
Hello there
I'm using sympy to solve some linear systems in my finite difference model (since I need nullspaces, I cannot use numpy least square directly).
Also since I don't know beforehand the size of my linear system (not big for now, not bigger than 10 variavles). I'm solving it without specify the "symbols" because I really don't care.
the line to solve is simpleand looks like linsolve(Matrix(np.c_[V,o])).
in this specific case (i think 6 variables involved), I got a free variable as response {(-1.0*tau0 - 0.916666666666667, 5.0*tau0 + 0.708333333333333, -10.0*tau0 + 0.375, 10.0*tau0 - 0.208333333333333, -5.0*tau0 + 0.0416666666666667, tau0)}, seems is autonamed tau0
I want to eval tau0 = 0, but without know the variable name before hand.
something like lin(Matrix(np.c_[V, o])) | all_free_variables = 0
Igor Morgado
@igormorgado
where | all_free_variables = 0 is a poetry freedom on python language, since I don't know how to do that
r.evalf(subs={tau0: 0}) doesn't works, and also ) don't want to specify the variable name, since I will not know beforehand
neither r.subs(tau0, 0), both complain about tau0 not being defined
Igor Morgado
@igormorgado

doing:
tau0 = symbols('tau0'); r.subs(tau0,0)

works. But I must know before hand each symbol. That I don't. =/

Igor Morgado
@igormorgado

I solved the issue with

r_tmp = linsolve(Matrix(np.c_[V[j], o]))
for symbol in list(r_tmp.free_symbols):
    r_tmp = r_tmp.subs(symbol,0)
mysolution = np.array(list(r_tmp)).ravel().astype(float)

Any smarter solution?

the mysolution is a numpy array as you could notice.
Kalevi Suominen
@jksuom
@igormorgado The docstring of linsolve says:
This message was deleted
If no symbols are given, internally generated symbols will be used.
It seems that you can give the names that you would like to use instead of the generated names like tau0.
Igor Morgado
@igormorgado
@jksuom But I cannot specify the names,since I don't know how many free vars will exist.
@jksuom in fact, I don't even know the size of the matrix beforehand. It will depend on size of the grid loaded. can have 500 variables.
V Gladkova
@valglad

@igormorgado That seems like a good enough solution, though I would do the substitution like:

zeros = [(s, 0) for s in r_tmp.free_symbols]
solution_as_list = r_tmp.subs(zeros)

Not sure what you are trying to do with the numpy array part though

Igor Morgado
@igormorgado
@valglad nice approach.
@valglad The solution_as_list, didn't returns a list per se, but a set with a tuple, as in: {(-0.916666666666667, 0.708333333333333, 0.375, -0.208333333333333, 0.0416666666666667, 0)} of type sympy.sets.sets.FiniteSet.
Igor Morgado
@igormorgado
@valglad Regarding to the numpy line. I'm very sticky to numpy, since I oftern work with it. Maybe I will keep everything inside sympy, until get the final solution.
V Gladkova
@valglad

I see, so you need to turn it into a list, flatten it and make everything a float. You could use a comprehension again like

solution = np.array([e for e in r_tmp]).astype(float)

It may or may not be slightly faster but it looks shorter

Ah, wait, that doesn't flatten it. So you'll have to do what you did or use SymPy's flatten anyway... Never mind then

Actually,

solution = np.array(*[e for e in r_tmp]).astype(float)

should flatten it as well

Igor Morgado
@igormorgado
@valglad thank you.
Igor Morgado
@igormorgado

wow. :-( Given the matrix PI

array([[ -0.917,   0.042,   0.   ,   0.   ,  -1.   ],
       [  0.708,  -1.125,   0.042,   0.   ,   5.   ],
       [  0.375,   1.125,  -1.125,   0.042, -10.   ],
       [ -0.208,  -0.042,   1.125,  -1.125,  10.   ],
       [  0.042,   0.   ,  -0.042,   1.125,  -5.   ],
       [  0.   ,   0.   ,   0.   ,  -0.042,   1.   ]])

and the vector c

array([-1.   ,  0.   ,  0.   , -0.042,  1.083, -0.042])

the solution given by

linsolve(Matrix(np.c_[PI,c]))

returns an EmptySet()

while the same operation in Maple 16 returns non empty, and exactly

np.array([649/576, 143/192, 75/64, 551/576, -25/13824])

that in float is around

array([ 1.127,  0.745,  1.172,  0.957, -0.002])

Any ideas?

maple_answer.png
the example in maple is shown above
Igor Morgado
@igormorgado
just to make clear, the float points in my PI matrix are not exactly 3 digits precision, I'm just showing the first 3 most significant digits using: np.set_printoptions(precision=3)
for sake of this test it was created using the ratios, as in
PI = np.array([
    [-11/12, 1/24, 0, 0, -1],
    [ 17/24, -9/8, 1/24, 0 ,5],
    [3/8, 9/8, -9/8, 1/24, -10],
    [-5/24, -1/24, 9/8, -9/8, 10],
    [1/24, 0, -1/24, 9/8, -5],
    [0, 0, 0, -1/24, 1]
])
Ideas, are very likely welcome.
Igor Morgado
@igormorgado
Using np.linalg.lstsq(PI, c, rcond=-1)[0] returned the expected answer as: array([ 1.127, 0.745, 1.172, 0.957, -0.002])
Igor Morgado
@igormorgado
but still, I would like to know what I'm doing wrong on Sympy side.
Kalevi Suominen
@jksuom

It seems that your system is over-determined. It has 6 equations in 5 variables. It can have solutions only if the determinant of the extended system is 0.

>>> P = Matrix([[ -0.917,   0.042,   0.   ,   0.   ,  -1.   ],
...        [  0.708,  -1.125,   0.042,   0.   ,   5.   ],
...        [  0.375,   1.125,  -1.125,   0.042, -10.   ],
...        [ -0.208,  -0.042,   1.125,  -1.125,  10.   ],
...        [  0.042,   0.   ,  -0.042,   1.125,  -5.   ],
...        [  0.   ,   0.   ,   0.   ,  -0.042,   1.   ]])
>>> c = Matrix([-1.   ,  0.   ,  0.   , -0.042,  1.083, -0.042])
>>> Pc = P.row_join(c)
>>> Pc.det()
0.000998125750125132

In this example, the determinant not 0 because of the inaccuracy of floating point numbers. Hence there is no solution.

Kalevi Suominen
@jksuom
You can probably find a solution if you remove one of the equations.
Het Patel
@hetp111
is NumPy related to sympy?
i am learning python megacourse on udemy and it is also teaching numpy, so i was wondering if it might be useful
Igor Morgado
@igormorgado
@hetp111 not related but can work together.
V Gladkova
@valglad
The lack of solutions is definitely a precision issue - if you input all entries as Rational (e.g. Rational(1,2) instead of 1/2), then linsolve returns the same as Maple (though obviously that's awkward)
V Gladkova
@valglad

A potential solution could be to define

rationalize = lambda x: [nsimplify(e) for e in x]

(this will turn numbers from a list into rationals). And then do

PI = Matrix(map(rationalize, [
    [-11/12, 1/24, 0, 0, -1],
    [ 17/24, -9/8, 1/24, 0 ,5],
    [3/8, 9/8, -9/8, 1/24, -10],
    [-5/24, -1/24, 9/8, -9/8, 10],
    [1/24, 0, -1/24, 9/8, -5],
    [0, 0, 0, -1/24, 1]
]))

and similarly for c. I've just checked and this returns the right solutions

Igor Morgado
@igormorgado
@jksuom I cant remove any variable unfortunately.
@valglad Amazing! I will test.
Kalevi Suominen
@jksuom
Do not remove any variables. There are too few already. Remove one of the equations.
There are 6 rows and only 5 columns. One row could be omitted.