I get this error when I run the MWE code below. Does anyone know how to resolve this? thanks!
Error: Error 10020: Q matrix is not positive semi-definite (PSD). Set NonConvex parameter to 2 to solve model.
MWE:
library(gurobi)
library(Matrix)
model <- list()
#optimization problem:
# max x + y
# s.t.
# -x + y <= 0
# x^2 - y^2 <= 10
# 0 <= x < = 20
# 0 <= y <= 20
model$obj <- c(1,1)
model$A <- matrix(c(-1,1), nrow=1, byrow=T) # for LHS of linear constraint: -x + y <= 0
model$rhs <- c(0) # for RHS of linear constraint: -x + y <= 0
model$ub[1] = 20 # x < = 20
model$ub[2] = 20 # y < = 20
model$sense <- c('<')
# non-convex quadratic constraint: x^2 - y^2 <= 10
qc1 <- list()
qc1$Qc <- spMatrix(2, 2, c(1, 2), c(1, 2), c(1.0, -1.0))
qc1$rhs <- 10
model$quadcon <- list(qc1)
#the QC constraint is a non-convex quadratic constraint, so set NonConvex = 2
model$params <- list(NonConvex=2)
gurobi_write(model,'quadtest.lp', env)
result <- gurobi(model) # THIS IS WHERE I GET THE ERROR ABOVE
print(result$objval)
print(result$x)
NM...i see that I can fix this by not putting the params as part of the model list, and instead running it as an input to the gurobi(,) call as follows:
params <- list(NonConvex=2)
result <- gurobi(model, params)
In an earlier question (R: Logical Conditions Not Being Respected), I learned how to make the following simulation :
Step 1: Keep generating two random numbers "a" and "b" until both "a" and "b" are greater than 12
Step 2: Track how many random numbers had to be generated until it took for Step 1 to be completed
Step 3: Repeat Step 1 and Step 2 100 times
res <- matrix(0, nrow = 0, ncol = 3)
for (j in 1:100){
a <- rnorm(1, 10, 1)
b <- rnorm(1, 10, 1)
i <- 1
while(a < 12 | b < 12) {
a <- rnorm(1, 10, 1)
b <- rnorm(1, 10, 1)
i <- i + 1
}
x <- c(a,b,i)
res <- rbind(res, x)
}
head(res)
[,1] [,2] [,3]
x 12.14232 12.08977 399
x 12.27158 12.01319 1695
x 12.57345 12.42135 302
x 12.07494 12.64841 600
x 12.03210 12.07949 82
x 12.34006 12.00365 782
Question: Now, I am trying to make a slight modification to the above code - Instead of "a" and "b" being produced separately, I want them to be produced "together" (in math terms: "a" and "b" were being produced from two independent univariate normal distributions, now I want them to come from a bivariate normal distribution).
I tried to modify this code myself:
library(MASS)
Sigma = matrix(
c(1,0.5, 0.5, 1), # the data elements
nrow=2, # number of rows
ncol=2, # number of columns
byrow = TRUE) # fill matrix by rows
res <- matrix(0, nrow = 0, ncol = 3)
for (j in 1:100){
e_i = data.frame(mvrnorm(n = 1, c(10,10), Sigma))
e_i$i <- 1
while(e_i$X1 < 12 | e_i$X2 < 12) {
e_i = data.frame(mvrnorm(n = 1, c(10,10), Sigma))
e_i$i <- i + 1
}
x <- c(e_i$X1, e_i$X2 ,i)
res <- rbind(res, x)
}
res = data.frame(res)
But this is producing the following error:
Error in while (e_i$X1 < 12 | e_i$X2 < 12) { : argument is of length
zero
If I understand your code correctly you are trying to see how many samples occur before both values are >=12 and doing that for 100 trials? This is the approach I would take:
library(MASS)
for(i in 1:100){
n <- 1
while(any((x <- mvrnorm(1, mu=c(10,10), Sigma=diag(0.5, nrow=2)+0.5))<12)) n <- n+1
if(i==1) res <- data.frame("a"=x[1], "b"=x[2], n)
else res <- rbind(res, data.frame("a"=x[1], "b"=x[2], n))
}
Here I am assigning the results of a mvrnorm to x within the while() call. In that same call, it evaluates whether either are less than 12 using the any() function. If that evaluates to FALSE, n (the counter) is increased and the process repeated. Once TRUE, the values are appended to your data.frame and it goes back to the start of the for-loop.
Regarding your code, the mvrnorm() function is returning a vector, not a matrix, when n=1 so both values go into a single variable in the data.frame:
data.frame(mvrnorm(n = 1, c(10,10), Sigma))
Returns:
mvrnorm.n...1..c.10..10...Sigma.
1 9.148089
2 10.605546
The matrix() function within your data.frame() calls, along with some tweaks to your use of i, will fix your code:
library(MASS)
Sigma = matrix(
c(1,0.5, 0.5, 1), # the data elements
nrow=2, # number of rows
ncol=2, # number of columns
byrow = TRUE) # fill matrix by rows
res <- matrix(0, nrow = 0, ncol = 3)
for (j in 1:10){
e_i = data.frame(matrix(mvrnorm(n = 1, c(10,10), Sigma), ncol=2))
i <- 1
while(e_i$X1[1] < 12 | e_i$X2[1] < 12) {
e_i = data.frame(matrix(mvrnorm(n = 1, c(10,10), Sigma), ncol=2))
i <- i + 1
}
x <- c(e_i$X1, e_i$X2 ,i)
res <- rbind(res, x)
}
res = data.frame(res)
I need to run a statistical test and compute p_hat_6, using N = 10 samples each of size n = 10 from X ∼ uniform(0, 14). Here is my original loop to calculate p_hat at mu=6:
pvalue <- rep(0,10)
reject <- 0
alpha <- 0.05
N <- 10
for (n in seq_along(pvalue)){
pvalue[n] <- wilcox.test(runif(10,0,14), mu=6)$p.value
reject[n] <- ifelse(pvalue[n] > alpha,0,1)
}
p_hat_6 <- (sum(reject))/N
p_hat_6
Using the same N and n, I need to repeat it 5 more times with the following changes:
(1) Data from X ∼ uniform(0, 16) and compute p_hat_7 (mu=7)
(2) Data from X ∼ uniform(0, 18) and compute p_hat_8 (mu=8)
(3) Data from X ∼ uniform(0, 20) and compute p_hat_9 (mu=9)
(4) Data from X ∼ uniform(0, 22) and compute p_hat_10 (mu=10)
(5) Data from X ∼ uniform(0, 24) and compute p_hat_11 (mu=11)
How do I loop through as the intervals increase by 2 each time and mu increase by 1 each time?
We can create a function
fun1 <- function(N, pvalue, reject, max_val, mu_val) {
for (n in seq_along(pvalue)){
pvalue[n] <- wilcox.test(runif(N ,0, max_val), mu=mu_val)$p.value
reject[n] <- ifelse(pvalue[n] > alpha,0,1)
}
p_hat_6 <- (sum(reject))/N
return(p_hat_6)
}
and use that in Map
Map(fun1, max_val = seq(14, 24, by = 2), mu_val = 6:11,
MoreArgs = list(N = 10, pvalue = pvalue, reject = reject))
-output
[[1]]
[1] 0
[[2]]
[1] 0.2
[[3]]
[1] 0.2
[[4]]
[1] 0
[[5]]
[1] 0.1
[[6]]
[1] 0.2
Or create an outer loop around the function
mu_val <- 6:11
max_val <- seq(14, 24, by = 2)
out <- numeric(length(mu_val))
for(i in seq_along(mu_val)) {
out[i] <- fun1(N = 10, pvalue = pvalue,
reject = reject, max_val = max_val[i], mu_val = mu_val[i])
}
out
[1] 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.0
data
N <- 10
pvalue <- rep(0, N)
reject <- rep(0, N)
alpha <- 0.05
I have the following code where I want to find the beste Values for x,y and z.
df <- data.frame(replicate(3,sample(0:100,100,rep=TRUE)))
find_best <- function(xyz) {
x <- xyz[1]
y <- xyz[2]
z <- xyz[3]
nr <- count(df)
val <- count(df[df[, "X1"] < x & df[, "X2"] < y & df[, "X3"] < z, ] )
return(val$n/nr$n)
}
optim(par = c(30,15,15), fn = find_best, lower=c(0,0,0), upper=c(100,100,100), method="L-BFGS-B")
The function does not achieve much at the moment, but I will add constraints later. However if I run this, I only get the value of the initial values back.
$par
[1] 30 15 15
So the question is, how can I get the best values for x,y,z either with optim or with anything else.
Here is an example of how you can use optim for your purpose
set.seed(1)
df <- data.frame(replicate(3,sample(0:100,1e5,rep=TRUE)))
find_best <- function(xyz) {
x <- xyz[1]
y <- xyz[2]
z <- xyz[3]
r <- nrow(subset(df,X1 < x & X2 < y & X3 < z))/nrow(df)
}
res <- optim(par = c(35,15,15), fn = find_best, lower=c(0,0,0), upper=c(100,100,100), control = list(fnscale = -1))
which gives
> res
$par
[1] 35.085 15.205 15.225
$value
[1] 0.00881
$counts
function gradient
2 2
$convergence
[1] 0
$message
[1] "CONVERGENCE: NORM OF PROJECTED GRADIENT <= PGTOL"
I've found polynomial coefficients from my data:
R <- c(0.256,0.512,0.768,1.024,1.28,1.437,1.594,1.72,1.846,1.972,2.098,2.4029)
Ic <- c(1.78,1.71,1.57,1.44,1.25,1.02,0.87,0.68,0.54,0.38,0.26,0.17)
NN <- 3
ft <- lm(Ic ~ poly(R, NN, raw = TRUE))
pc <- coef(ft)
So I can create a polynomial function:
f1 <- function(x) pc[1] + pc[2] * x + pc[3] * x ^ 2 + pc[4] * x ^ 3
And for example, take a derivative:
g1 <- Deriv(f1)
How to create a universal function so that it doesn't have to be rewritten for every new polynomial degree NN?
My original answer may not be what you really want, as it was numerical rather symbolic. Here is the symbolic solution.
## use `"x"` as variable name
## taking polynomial coefficient vector `pc`
## can return a string, or an expression by further parsing (mandatory for `D`)
f <- function (pc, expr = TRUE) {
stringexpr <- paste("x", seq_along(pc) - 1, sep = " ^ ")
stringexpr <- paste(stringexpr, pc, sep = " * ")
stringexpr <- paste(stringexpr, collapse = " + ")
if (expr) return(parse(text = stringexpr))
else return(stringexpr)
}
## an example cubic polynomial with coefficients 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4
cubic <- f(pc = 1:4 / 10, TRUE)
## using R base's `D` (requiring expression)
dcubic <- D(cubic, name = "x")
# 0.2 + 2 * x * 0.3 + 3 * x^2 * 0.4
## using `Deriv::Deriv`
library(Deriv)
dcubic <- Deriv(cubic, x = "x", nderiv = 1L)
# expression(0.2 + x * (0.6 + 1.2 * x))
Deriv(f(1:4 / 10, FALSE), x = "x", nderiv = 1L) ## use string, get string
# [1] "0.2 + x * (0.6 + 1.2 * x)"
Of course, Deriv makes higher order derivatives easier to get. We can simply set nderiv. For D however, we have to use recursion (see examples of ?D).
Deriv(cubic, x = "x", nderiv = 2L)
# expression(0.6 + 2.4 * x)
Deriv(cubic, x = "x", nderiv = 3L)
# expression(2.4)
Deriv(cubic, x = "x", nderiv = 4L)
# expression(0)
If we use expression, we will be able to evaluate the result later. For example,
eval(cubic, envir = list(x = 1:4)) ## cubic polynomial
# [1] 1.0 4.9 14.2 31.3
eval(dcubic, envir = list(x = 1:4)) ## its first derivative
# [1] 2.0 6.2 12.8 21.8
The above implies that we can wrap up an expression for a function. Using a function has several advantages, one being that we are able to plot it using curve or plot.function.
fun <- function(x, expr) eval.parent(expr, n = 0L)
Note, the success of fun requires expr to be an expression in terms of symbol x. If expr was defined in terms of y for example, we need to define fun with function (y, expr). Now let's use curve to plot cubic and dcubic, on a range 0 < x < 5:
curve(fun(x, cubic), from = 0, to = 5) ## colour "black"
curve(fun(x, dcubic), add = TRUE, col = 2) ## colour "red"
The most convenient way, is of course to define a single function FUN rather than doing f + fun combination. In this way, we also don't need to worry about the consistency on the variable name used by f and fun.
FUN <- function (x, pc, nderiv = 0L) {
## check missing arguments
if (missing(x) || missing(pc)) stop ("arguments missing with no default!")
## expression of polynomial
stringexpr <- paste("x", seq_along(pc) - 1, sep = " ^ ")
stringexpr <- paste(stringexpr, pc, sep = " * ")
stringexpr <- paste(stringexpr, collapse = " + ")
expr <- parse(text = stringexpr)
## taking derivatives
dexpr <- Deriv::Deriv(expr, x = "x", nderiv = nderiv)
## evaluation
val <- eval.parent(dexpr, n = 0L)
## note, if we take to many derivatives so that `dexpr` becomes constant
## `val` is free of `x` so it will only be of length 1
## we need to repeat this constant to match `length(x)`
if (length(val) == 1L) val <- rep.int(val, length(x))
## now we return
val
}
Suppose we want to evaluate a cubic polynomial with coefficients pc <- c(0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4) and its derivatives on x <- seq(0, 1, 0.2), we can simply do:
FUN(x, pc)
# [1] 0.1000 0.1552 0.2536 0.4144 0.6568 1.0000
FUN(x, pc, nderiv = 1L)
# [1] 0.200 0.368 0.632 0.992 1.448 2.000
FUN(x, pc, nderiv = 2L)
# [1] 0.60 1.08 1.56 2.04 2.52 3.00
FUN(x, pc, nderiv = 3L)
# [1] 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4
FUN(x, pc, nderiv = 4L)
# [1] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Now plotting is also easy:
curve(FUN(x, pc), from = 0, to = 5)
curve(FUN(x, pc, 1), from = 0, to = 5, add = TRUE, col = 2)
curve(FUN(x, pc, 2), from = 0, to = 5, add = TRUE, col = 3)
curve(FUN(x, pc, 3), from = 0, to = 5, add = TRUE, col = 4)
Since my final solution with symbolic derivatives eventually goes too long, I use a separate session for numerical calculations. We can do this as for polynomials, derivatives are explicitly known so we can code them. Note, there will be no use of R expression here; everything is done directly by using functions.
So we first generate polynomial basis from degree 0 to degree p - n, then multiply coefficient and factorial multiplier. It is more convenient to use outer than poly here.
## use `outer`
g <- function (x, pc, nderiv = 0L) {
## check missing aruments
if (missing(x) || missing(pc)) stop ("arguments missing with no default!")
## polynomial order p
p <- length(pc) - 1L
## number of derivatives
n <- nderiv
## earlier return?
if (n > p) return(rep.int(0, length(x)))
## polynomial basis from degree 0 to degree `(p - n)`
X <- outer(x, 0:(p - n), FUN = "^")
## initial coefficients
## the additional `+ 1L` is because R vector starts from index 1 not 0
beta <- pc[n:p + 1L]
## factorial multiplier
beta <- beta * factorial(n:p) / factorial(0:(p - n))
## matrix vector multiplication
drop(X %*% beta)
}
We still use the example x and pc defined in the symbolic solution:
x <- seq(0, 1, by = 0.2)
pc <- 1:4 / 10
g(x, pc, 0)
# [1] 0.1000 0.1552 0.2536 0.4144 0.6568 1.0000
g(x, pc, 1)
# [1] 0.200 0.368 0.632 0.992 1.448 2.000
g(x, pc, 2)
# [1] 0.60 1.08 1.56 2.04 2.52 3.00
g(x, pc, 3)
# [1] 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4
g(x, pc, 4)
# [1] 0 0 0 0 0 0
The result is consistent with what we have with FUN in the the symbolic solution.
Similarly, we can plot g using curve:
curve(g(x, pc), from = 0, to = 5)
curve(g(x, pc, 1), from = 0, to = 5, col = 2, add = TRUE)
curve(g(x, pc, 2), from = 0, to = 5, col = 3, add = TRUE)
curve(g(x, pc, 3), from = 0, to = 5, col = 4, add = TRUE)
Now after quite much effort in demonstrating how we can work out this question ourselves, consider using R package polynom. As a small package, it aims at implementing construction, derivatives, integration, arithmetic and roots-finding of univariate polynomials. This package is written completely with R language, without any compiled code.
## install.packages("polynom")
library(polynom)
We still consider the cubic polynomial example used before.
pc <- 1:4 / 10
## step 1: making a "polynomial" object as preparation
pcpoly <- polynomial(pc)
#0.1 + 0.2*x + 0.3*x^2 + 0.4*x^3
## step 2: compute derivative
expr <- deriv(pcpoly)
## step 3: convert to function
g1 <- as.function(expr)
#function (x)
#{
# w <- 0
# w <- 1.2 + x * w
# w <- 0.6 + x * w
# w <- 0.2 + x * w
# w
#}
#<environment: 0x9f4867c>
Note, by step-by-step construction, the resulting function has all parameters inside. It only requires a single argument for x value. In contrast, functions in the other two answers will take coefficients and derivative order as mandatory arguments, too. We can call this function
g1(seq(0, 1, 0.2))
# [1] 0.200 0.368 0.632 0.992 1.448 2.000
To produce the same graph we see in other two answers, we get other derivatives as well:
g0 <- as.function(pcpoly) ## original polynomial
## second derivative
expr <- deriv(expr)
g2 <- as.function(expr)
#function (x)
#{
# w <- 0
# w <- 2.4 + x * w
# w <- 0.6 + x * w
# w
#}
#<environment: 0x9f07c68>
## third derivative
expr <- deriv(expr)
g3 <- as.function(expr)
#function (x)
#{
# w <- 0
# w <- 2.4 + x * w
# w
#}
#<environment: 0x9efd740>
Perhaps you have already noticed that I did not specify nderiv, but recursively take 1 derivative at a time. This may be a disadvantage of this package. It does not facilitate higher order derivatives.
Now we can make a plot
## As mentioned, `g0` to `g3` are parameter-free
curve(g0(x), from = 0, to = 5)
curve(g1(x), add = TRUE, col = 2)
curve(g2(x), add = TRUE, col = 3)
curve(g3(x), add = TRUE, col = 4)