How can I evaluate a function in several points, when I have a function like f(x) = x^2 and I would like to compute f(10) - f(9)?
I know that I can evaluate this function in each point by evaluate x^2 at x=10, is it possible to evaluate this function in several points?
This will do:
evaluate x^2 at x in {9,10}
Related
I need to use the step function in order to count the number of non-zero elements in a parameter. The step function that I am considering is the following:
After searching on the internet for solution, I realized we can create stepwise functions in GAMS, but I need a continuous function for x > 1.
I tried the following code to reproduce a step-like function:
round(1 / (1 + exp(-x)) - 0.01)
which is:
Unfortunately, this formula does not work with GAMS. When I try to run the code, I got this error:
Endogenous function argument(s) not allowed in linear models
I am working with a MIP (Mixed Integer Linear Program) model. Is there a way to use a step function in GAMS?
I assume, that x is a variable in your code? Then you can try something like this (if x would be a parameter, it would be easier):
Equation a, b;
Variable x;
Binary Variable y;
Scalar BigM / 1e3/
SmallM /1e-3/;
a.. y*BigM =g= x;
b.. y*SmallM =l= x;
So, if x=0, y will be 0 as well because of equation b. And if x>0, y will become 1 because of equation a. The BigM you should choose as small as possible and as big as necessary (so it should be the maximum value x can take) and SmallM the other way around. This assumes of course, that there is something like a lower and upper bound for x, if it is not 0...
Hope that helps!
Lutz
I am looking forward to minimize a non linear function with 3 arguments (x1,x2 and x3)
My sources of information are:
the explanation of the minimization function:
https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/generated/scipy.optimize.minimize.html
And an example they provide:
https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/tutorial/optimize.html
I do not belong to a mathematical area, so first off forgive me if I am using incorrect wording / expressions.
This is my code :
import numpy as np
from scipy.optimize import minimize
def rosen(x1,x2,x3):
return np.sqrt(((x1**2)*0.002)+((x2**2)*0.0035)+((x3**2)*0.0015)+(2*x1*x2*0.015)+(2*x1*x3*0.01)+(2*x2*x3*0.02))
I think that the first step is okey up to here..
Then it is required to state the:
x0 : ndarray
Initial guess. len(x0) is the dimensionality of the minimization problem.
Given that I am stating 3 args in the minimization function I shall state a 3 dim array , such like this?
x0=np.array([1,1,1])
res = minimize(rosen, x0)
print(res.x)
The undesired output is:
rosen() missing 2 required positional arguments: 'x2' and 'x3'
Which I do not really understand where shall I state the positional arguments.
Apart from that I would like to set some bounds for the outputing values for x1,x2,x3 .
Which I tried
res = minimize(rosen, x0, bounds=([0,None]),options={"disp": False})
Which outputs also that :
ValueError: length of x0 != length of bounds
How should I then express the bounds inside the res then?
The desired output would be simply to output an array for x1,x2,x3 according to the minimization of the function where each value is minimun 0, as stated in the bounds and that the sum of the args add up to 1.
Function-definition
Read the docs carefully, e.g. for your function-def:
fun : callable
The objective function to be minimized. Must be in the form f(x, *args). The
optimizing argument, x, is a 1-D array of points, and args is a tuple of any
additional fixed parameters needed to completely specify the function.
Your function should take a 1d-array, while you implement the multi-argument for multi-variables approach!
Changing:
def rosen(x1,x2,x3):
return np.sqrt(((x1**2)*0.002)+((x2**2)*0.0035)+((x3**2)*0.0015)+(2*x1*x2*0.015)+(2*x1*x3*0.01)+(2*x2*x3*0.02))
def rosen(x):
x1,x2,x3 = x # unpack vector for your kind of calculations
return np.sqrt(((x1**2)*0.002)+((x2**2)*0.0035)+((x3**2)*0.0015)+(2*x1*x2*0.015)+(2*x1*x3*0.01)+(2*x2*x3*0.02))
should work. This is a bit a repair-something-to-keep-my-other-code approach but won't hurt much in this example. Usually you implement your function-definition on the 1d-array-input assumption!
Bounds
Again from the docs:
bounds : sequence, optional
Bounds for variables (only for L-BFGS-B, TNC and SLSQP). (min, max) pairs for each
element in x, defining the bounds on that parameter. Use None for one of min or max
when there is no bound in that direction.
So you need n_vars pairs! Easily achieved by using a list-comprehension, deducing the necessary info from x0.
res = minimize(rosen, x0, bounds=[[0,None] for i in range(len(x0))],options={"disp": False})
Make variables sum up to 1 / Constraints
Your comment implies you want the variables to sum up to 1. You would need to use an equality-constraint then (only 1 solver supporting this and inequality-constraints; one other only inequality-constraints; the rest no constraints; solver will be picked automatically if none explicitly given).
It looks somewhat like:
cons = ({'type': 'eq', 'fun': lambda x: sum(x) - 1}) # read docs to understand!
# to think about:
# sum vs. np.sum
# (not much diff here)
res = minimize(rosen, x0, bounds=[[0,None] for i in range(len(x0))],options={"disp": False}, constraints=cons)
For the case of x nonnegative, the constraint is usually called the probability-simplex.
(untested code; conceptually correct!)
def get_z(epsilon):
return tf.cond(flag,lambda: mean + sigma*epsilon,lambda: epsilon)
In this, when I call the function with flag = True, I have my mean and sigma tensors defined and epsilon is the placeholder I give, and it works well.
If I call it with flag = False, I have to simply return epsilon, the placeholder I give. But at this stage, the mean and sigma are not defined as I am not providing the data to compute mean and sigma. However that shouldn't matter because mean and sigma are not needed. But running this is throwing the error to define mean and sigma. Is there any work-around for this?
Thank you.
mean and sigma should be defined as the lambda function depends on the two values, you may use them as function input. Two placeholders with mean and sigma may be used.
def get_z(epsilon, mean, sigma):
return tf.cond(flag,lambda: mean + sigma*epsilon,lambda: epsilon)
I am trying to understand gradient descent algorithm by plotting the error vs value of parameters in the function. What would be an example of a simple function of the form y = f(x) with just just one input variable x and two parameters w1 and w2 such that it has a non-convex loss function ? Is y = w1.tanh(w2.x) an example ? What i am trying to achieve is this :
How does one know if the function has a non-convex loss function without plotting the graph ?
In iterative optimization algorithms such as gradient descent or Gauss-Newton, what matters is whether the function is locally convex. This is correct (on a convex set) if and only if the Hessian matrix (Jacobian of gradient) is positive semi-definite. As for a non-convex function of one variable (see my Edit below), a perfect example is the function you provide. This is because its second derivative, i.e Hessian (which is of size 1*1 here) can be computed as follows:
first_deriv=d(w1*tanh(w2*x))/dx= w1*w2 * sech^2(w2*x)
second_deriv=d(first_deriv)/dx=some_const*sech^2(w2*x)*tanh(w2*x)
The sech^2 part is always positive, so the sign of second_deriv depends on the sign of tanh, which can vary depending on the values you supply as x and w2. Therefore, we can say that it is not convex everywhere.
Edit: It wasn't clear to me what you meant by one input variable and two parameters, so I assumed that w1 and w2 were fixed beforehand, and computed the derivative w.r.t x. But I think that if you want to optimize w1 and w2 (as I suppose it makes more sense if your function is from a toy neural net), then you can compute the 2*2 Hessian in a similar way.
The same way as in high-school algebra: the second derivative tells you the direction of flex. If that's negative in all orientations, then the function is convex.
I am trying to fit a quadratic to some experimental data and using polyfit in numpy. I am looking to get a concave curve, and hence want to make sure that the coefficient of the quadratic term is negative, also the fit itself is weighted, as in there are some weights on the points. Is there an easy way to do that? Thanks.
The use of weights is described here (numpy.polyfit).
Basically, you need a weight vector with the same length as x and y.
To avoid the wrong sign in the coefficient, you could use a fit function definition like
def fitfunc(x,a,b,c):
return -1 * abs(a) * x**2 + b * x + c
This will give you a negative coefficient for x**2 at all times.
You can use curve_fit
.
Or you can run polyfit with rank 2 and if the last coefficient is bigger than 0. run again linear polyfit (polyfit with rank 1)