I am iteratively solving this implicit equation
using fsolve within a for loop over a range of values of the independent variable, V.
I also want to vary I_L and run the for loop over each value and generate an individual text files.
I know how to use the open and write text files, what I'm struggling with is setting loops up correctly to output what I want.
I have coded a simpler example below to allow for ease of understanding since it's just the loops I'm stuck on.
import numpy as np
from scipy.optimize import fsolve
import scipy.constants as sc
x = np.linspace(-1, 1, 1001)
C_vary = [0, 1, 2, 3]
def equation(y, x, C):
return C - np.exp(x+y) - y
for C in C_vary:
y = []
Solve equation at each value of C_vary and output y values to new list of
results
I have introduced an initial guess for the function y(x), but you can check the details further. The output y is a list, with each element corresponding to a value of the C_vary parameters, for each x.
import numpy as np
from scipy.optimize import fsolve
import scipy.constants as sc
x = np.linspace(-1, 1, 1001)
C_vary = [0, 1, 2, 3]
def equation(y, x, C):
return C - np.exp(x+y) - y
y0 = np.exp( 0.5*x ) #initial guess
y = [ fsolve( equation, y0, (x,ci) ) for ci in C_vary ]
If you are after I as a function of V and other parameters, you can solve the equation by means of the Lambert W function.
It has the form
z = e^(a z + b)
where z is linear in I, and this is
- a z e^(- a z) = - a e^b
or
z = - W(-a e^b) / a.
Related
I'm trying to write a function that accepts inputs of coefficients for polynomial f(x) and returns the corresponding f(-x). This is what I have so far:
import numpy as np
coeff = [1, -5, 2, -5]
poly = np.poly1d(coeff)
print (poly)
This prints out:
1x³ - 5x² + 2x - 5
I'm stuck here, since using poly(-x) or any values of x calculates the whole equation itself. Is there any workaround here? What I only want is for the code to do f(-x) such that 1(-1)³ - 5(-1)² + 2(-1) + 5 prints out:
-1x³ - 5x² - 2x - 5
Thank you!
The issue is that you are defining your polynomial by it's coefficients. I would instead define the variable x and let the module itself handle all the manipulations.
import numpy as np
x = np.poly1d([1,0])
p = x**3 - 5*x**2 + 2*x - 5
print(p(-x))
Just multiply by -1 to coeff list like below
import numpy as np
coeff = np.array([1, -5, 2, -5])
poly1 = np.poly1d(coeff)
print (poly1)
poly2 = np.poly1d(-1 * coeff)
print(poly2)
I have a differential equation:
from scipy.integrate import odeint
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
# function that returns dy/dt
def model(y,t):
k = 0.3
dydt = -k * y
return dydt
# initial condition
y0 = 5
# time points
t = np.linspace(0,10)
t1=2
# solve ODE
y = odeint(model,y0,t)
And I want to evaluate the solution of this differential equation on two different points. For example I want y(t=2) and y(t=3).
I can solve the problem in the following way:
Suppose that you need y(2). Then you, define
t = np.linspace(0,2)
and just print
print y[-1]
In order to get the value of y(2). However I think that this procedure is slow, since I need to do the same again in order to calculate y(3), and if I want another point I need to do same again. So there is some faster way to do this?
isn't this just:
y = odeint(model, y0, [0, 2, 3])[1:]
i.e. the third parameter just specifies the values of t that you want back.
as an example of printing the results out, we'd just follow the above with:
print(f'y(2) = {y[0,0]}')
print(f'y(3) = {y[1,0]}')
which gives me:
y(2) = 2.7440582441900494
y(3) = 2.032848408317066
which seems the same as the anytical solution:
5 * np.exp(-0.3 * np.array([2,3]))
You can get exactly what you want if you use solve_ivp with the dense-output option
from scipy.integrate import solve_ivp
# function that returns dy/dt
def model(t,y):
k = 0.3
dydt = -k * y
return dydt
# initial condition
y0 = [5]
# solve ODE
res = solve_ivp(model,[0,10],y0,dense_output=True)
y = lambda t: res.sol(t)[0]
for t in [2,3,3.4]:
print(f'y({t}) = {y(t)}')
with the output
y(2) = 2.743316182689662
y(3) = 2.0315223673200338
y(3.4) = 1.802238620366918
My task is to do first an integration and second a trapezoid integration with Python of f(x)=x^2
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
x = np.arange(-10,10)
y = x**2
l=plt.plot(x,y)
plt.show(l)
Now I want to integrate this function to get this: F(x)=(1/3)x^3 with the picture:
This should be the output in the end:
Could someone explain me how to get the antiderivative F(x) of f(x)=x^2 with python?
I want to do this with a normal integration and a trapeze integration. For trapezoidal integration from (-10 to 10) and a step size of 0.01 (width of the trapezoids). In the end I want to get the function F(x)=(1/3)x^3 in both cases. How can I reach this?
Thanks for helping me.
There are two key observations:
the trapezoidal rule refers to numeric integration, whose output is not an integral function but a number
integration is up to an arbitrary constant which is not included in your definition of F(x)
With this in mind, you can use scipy.integrate.trapz() to define an integral function:
import numpy as np
from scipy.integrate import trapz
def numeric_integral(x, f, c=0):
return np.array([sp.integrate.trapz(f(x[:i]), x[:i]) for i in range(len(x))]) + c
or, more efficiently, using scipy.integrate.cumtrapz() (which does the computation from above):
import numpy as np
from scipy.integrate import cumtrapz
def numeric_integral(x, f, c=0):
return cumtrapz(f(x), x, initial=c)
This plots as below:
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
def func(x):
return x ** 2
x = np.arange(-10, 10, 0.01)
y = func(x)
Y = numeric_integral(x, func)
plt.plot(x, y, label='f(x) = x²')
plt.plot(x, Y, label='F(x) = x³/3 + c')
plt.plot(x, x ** 3 / 3, label='F(x) = x³/3')
plt.legend()
which provides you the desidered result except for the arbitrary constant, which you should specify yourself.
For good measure, while not relevant in this case, note that np.arange() does not provide stable results if used with a fractional step. Typically, one would use np.linspace() instead.
The cumtrapz function from scipy will provide an antiderivative using trapezoid integration:
from scipy.integrate import cumtrapz
yy = cumtrapz(y, x, initial=0)
# make yy==0 around x==0 (optional)
i_x0 = np.where(x >= 0)[0][0]
yy -= yy[i_x0]
Trapezoid integration
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
x = np.arange(-10, 10, 0.1)
f = x**2
F = [-333.35]
for i in range(1, len(x) - 1):
F.append((f[i] + f[i - 1])*(x[i] - x[i - 1])/2 + F[i - 1])
F = np.array(F)
fig, ax = plt.subplots()
ax.plot(x, f)
ax.plot(x[1:], F)
plt.show()
Here I have applied the theoretical formula (f[i] + f[i - 1])*(x[i] - x[i - 1])/2 + F[i - 1], while the integration is done in the block:
F = [-333.35]
for i in range(1, len(x) - 1):
F.append((f[i] + f[i - 1])*(x[i] - x[i - 1])/2 + F[i - 1])
F = np.array(F)
Note that, in order to plot x and F, they must have the same number of element; so I ignore the first element of x, so they both have 199 element. This is a result of the trapezoid method: if you integrate an array f of n elements, you obtain an array F of n-1 elements. Moreover, I set the initial value of F to -333.35 at x = -10, this is the arbitrary constant from the integration process, I decided that value in order to pass the function near the origin.
Analytical integration
import sympy as sy
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
x = sy.symbols('x')
f = x**2
F = sy.integrate(f, x)
xv = np.arange(-10, 10, 0.1)
fv = sy.lambdify(x, f)(xv)
Fv = sy.lambdify(x, F)(xv)
fig, ax = plt.subplots()
ax.plot(xv, fv)
ax.plot(xv, Fv)
plt.show()
Here I use the symbolic math through sympy module. The integration is done in the block:
F = sy.integrate(f, x)
Note that, in this case, F and x have already the same number of elements. Moreover, the code is simpler.
I want to ask something that provably is extremly easy but I didn't find how to do it... The point is that I want to define some function in python in a symbolic way using sympy in order to make its derivative and then use this expresion numerically.
Here an example is showed:
import numpy as np
from sympy import *
z = Symbol('z')
function = z*exp(z**2)
deriv = diff(function, z)
x = np.arange(1, 3, 0.1) #interval of points
#How can I evaluate numerically this array "x" with the function deriv???
Do you know how to do it? Thanks!
You can use lambdify with the numpy backend:
import numpy as np
from sympy import *
z = Symbol('z')
function = z*exp(z**2)
deriv = diff(function, z)
x = np.arange(1, 3, 0.1) #interval of points
d = lambdify(z, deriv, "numpy")
d(x)
# array([ 8.15484549e+00, 1.14689175e+01, 1.63762998e+01,
# 2.37373255e+01, 3.49286892e+01, 5.21825471e+01,
# 7.91672020e+01, 1.21994639e+02, 1.90992239e+02,
# 3.03860954e+02, 4.91383350e+02, 8.07886132e+02,
# 1.35069268e+03, 2.29681687e+03, 3.97320108e+03,
# 6.99317313e+03, 1.25255647e+04, 2.28335915e+04,
# 4.23706166e+04, 8.00431723e+04])
So I've got some data stored as two lists, and plotted them using
plot(datasetx, datasety)
Then I set a trendline
trend = polyfit(datasetx, datasety)
trendx = []
trendy = []
for a in range(datasetx[0], (datasetx[-1]+1)):
trendx.append(a)
trendy.append(trend[0]*a**2 + trend[1]*a + trend[2])
plot(trendx, trendy)
But I have a third list of data, which is the error in the original datasety. I'm fine with plotting the errorbars, but what I don't know is using this, how to find the error in the coefficients of the polynomial trendline.
So say my trendline came out to be 5x^2 + 3x + 4 = y, there needs to be some sort of error on the 5, 3 and 4 values.
Is there a tool using NumPy that will calculate this for me?
I think you can use the function curve_fit of scipy.optimize (documentation). A basic example of the usage:
import numpy as np
from scipy.optimize import curve_fit
def func(x, a, b, c):
return a*x**2 + b*x + c
x = np.linspace(0,4,50)
y = func(x, 5, 3, 4)
yn = y + 0.2*np.random.normal(size=len(x))
popt, pcov = curve_fit(func, x, yn)
Following the documentation, pcov gives:
The estimated covariance of popt. The diagonals provide the variance
of the parameter estimate.
So in this way you can calculate an error estimate on the coefficients. To have the standard deviation you can take the square root of the variance.
Now you have an error on the coefficients, but it is only based on the deviation between the ydata and the fit. In case you also want to account for an error on the ydata itself, the curve_fit function provides the sigma argument:
sigma : None or N-length sequence
If not None, it represents the standard-deviation of ydata. This
vector, if given, will be used as weights in the least-squares
problem.
A complete example:
import numpy as np
from scipy.optimize import curve_fit
def func(x, a, b, c):
return a*x**2 + b*x + c
x = np.linspace(0,4,20)
y = func(x, 5, 3, 4)
# generate noisy ydata
yn = y + 0.2 * y * np.random.normal(size=len(x))
# generate error on ydata
y_sigma = 0.2 * y * np.random.normal(size=len(x))
popt, pcov = curve_fit(func, x, yn, sigma = y_sigma)
# plot
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
fig = plt.figure()
ax = fig.add_subplot(111)
ax.errorbar(x, yn, yerr = y_sigma, fmt = 'o')
ax.plot(x, np.polyval(popt, x), '-')
ax.text(0.5, 100, r"a = {0:.3f} +/- {1:.3f}".format(popt[0], pcov[0,0]**0.5))
ax.text(0.5, 90, r"b = {0:.3f} +/- {1:.3f}".format(popt[1], pcov[1,1]**0.5))
ax.text(0.5, 80, r"c = {0:.3f} +/- {1:.3f}".format(popt[2], pcov[2,2]**0.5))
ax.grid()
plt.show()
Then something else, about using numpy arrays. One of the main advantages of using numpy is that you can avoid for loops because operations on arrays apply elementwise. So the for-loop in your example can also be done as following:
trendx = arange(datasetx[0], (datasetx[-1]+1))
trendy = trend[0]*trendx**2 + trend[1]*trendx + trend[2]
Where I use arange instead of range as it returns a numpy array instead of a list.
In this case you can also use the numpy function polyval:
trendy = polyval(trend, trendx)
I have not been able to find any way of getting the errors in the coefficients that is built in to numpy or python. I have a simple tool that I wrote based on Section 8.5 and 8.6 of John Taylor's An Introduction to Error Analysis. Maybe this will be sufficient for your task (note the default return is the variance, not the standard deviation). You can get large errors (as in the provided example) because of significant covariance.
def leastSquares(xMat, yMat):
'''
Purpose
-------
Perform least squares using the procedure outlined in 8.5 and 8.6 of Taylor, solving
matrix equation X a = Y
Examples
--------
>>> from scipy import matrix
>>> xMat = matrix([[ 1, 5, 25],
[ 1, 7, 49],
[ 1, 9, 81],
[ 1, 11, 121]])
>>> # matrix has rows of format [constant, x, x^2]
>>> yMat = matrix([[142],
[168],
[211],
[251]])
>>> a, varCoef, yRes = leastSquares(xMat, yMat)
>>> # a is a column matrix, holding the three coefficients a, b, c, corresponding to
>>> # the equation a + b*x + c*x^2
Returns
-------
a: matrix
best fit coefficients
varCoef: matrix
variance of derived coefficents
yRes: matrix
y-residuals of fit
'''
xMatSize = xMat.shape
numMeas = xMatSize[0]
numVars = xMatSize[1]
xxMat = xMat.T * xMat
xyMat = xMat.T * yMat
xxMatI = xxMat.I
aMat = xxMatI * xyMat
yAvgMat = xMat * aMat
yRes = yMat - yAvgMat
var = (yRes.T * yRes) / (numMeas - numVars)
varCoef = xxMatI.diagonal() * var[0, 0]
return aMat, varCoef, yRes