Related
I'm supposed to write a predicate that does some math stuff. But I don't know how to pass numbers or return numbers.
Maybe you can give me an example?
Let's say a predicate divide/2 that takes two numbers a and b and returns a/b.
Yes, you pass numbers in in some arguments, and you get the result back in some other argument(s) (usually last). For example
divide( N, D, R) :-
R is N / D.
Trying:
112 ?- divide(100,5,X).
X = 20.
113 ?- divide(100,7,X).
X = 14.285714285714286.
Now, this predicate is divide/3, because it has three arguments: two for inputs and one for the output "information flow".
This is a simplified, restricted version of what a Prolog predicate can do. Which is, to not be that uni-directional.
I guess "return" is a vague term. Expression languages have expressions e-value-ated so a function's last expression's value becomes that function's "return" value; Prolog does not do that. But command-oriented languages return values by putting them into some special register. That's not much different conceptually from Prolog putting some value into some logvar.
Of course unification is more complex, and more versatile. But still, functions are relations too. Predicates "return" values by successfully unifying their arguments with them, or fail to do so, as shown in the other answer.
Prolog is all about unifying variables. Predicates don't return values, they just succeed or fail.
Typically when a predicate is expected to produce values based on some of the arguments then the left-most arguments are inputs and the right-most are the outputs. However, many predicates work with allowing any argument to be an input and any to be a output.
Here's an example for multiply showing how it is used to perform divide.
multiply(X,Y,Z) :- number(X),number(Y),Z is X * Y.
multiply(X,Y,Z) :- number(X),number(Z),X \= 0,Y is Z / X.
multiply(X,Y,Z) :- number(Y),number(Z),Y \= 0,X is Z / Y.
Now I can query it like this:
?- multiply(5,9,X).
X = 45 .
But I can easily do divide:
?- multiply(5,X,9).
X = 1.8 .
It even fails if I try to do a division by 0:
?- multiply(X,0,9).
false.
Here's another approach. So let's say you have a list [22,24,34,66] and you want to divide each answer by the number 2. First we have the base predicate where if the list is empty and the number is zero so cut. Cut means to come out of the program or just stop don't go to the further predicates. The next predicate checks each Head of the list and divides it by the number A, meaning (2). And then we simply print the Answer. In order for it to go through each element of the list we send back the Tail [24,34,66] to redo the steps. So for the next step 24 becomes the Head and the remaining digits [34,66] become the Tail.
divideList([],0,0):-!.
divideList([H|T],A,Answer):-
Answer is H//A,
writeln(Answer),
divideList(T,A,_).
?- divideList([22,24,34,66],2,L).
OUTPUT:
11
12
17
33
Another simpler approach:
divideList([],_,[]).
divideList([H|T],A,[H1|L]):-
H1 is H//A,!,
divideList(T,A,L).
?-divideList([22,4,56,38],2,Answer).
Answer = [11, 2, 28, 19]
Everything I've read about Elixir says that assignment should be thought of as pattern matching. If so then why does x = x + 1 work in Elixir? There is no value of x for which x = x + 1.
Everything I've read about Elixir says that assignment should be thought of as pattern matching.
In Elixir, = is called the pattern match operator, but it does not work the same way as the pattern match operator in Erlang. That's because in Elixir variables are not single assignment like they are in Erlang. Here's the way Erlang works:
~/erlang_programs$ erl
Erlang/OTP 20 [erts-9.3] [source] [64-bit] [smp:4:4] [ds:4:4:10] [async-threads:10] [hipe] [kernel-poll:false]
Eshell V9.3 (abort with ^G)
1> X = 15.
15
2> X = 100.
** exception error: no match of right hand side value 100
3> X.
15
4>
Therefore, in Erlang this fails:
4> X = X + 1.
** exception error: no match of right hand side value 16
Things are pretty simple with Erlang's single assignment: because X already has a value, the line X = X + 1 cannot be an attempt to assign a new value to X, so that line is an attempt to pattern match (15 = 15 + 1), which will always fail.
On the other hand, in Elixir variables are not single assignment:
Interactive Elixir (1.6.6) - press Ctrl+C to exit (type h() ENTER for help)
iex(1)> x = 15
15
iex(2)> x = 100
100
iex(3)> x
100
iex(4)>
The fact that variables are not single assignment in Elixir means that Elixir needs to make a choice when you write:
x = 10
x = x + 1 #or even x = 15
Choice 1) Should the second line be interpreted as assignment to x?
Choice 2) Should the second line be interpreted as an attempt to pattern match (i.e. 10 = 11)?
Elixir goes with Choice 1. That means that actually performing a pattern match with the so called pattern match operator in Elixir is more difficult: you have to use the pin operator(^) in conjunction with the match operator(=):
x = 10
^x = x + 1
Now, the second line will always fail. There is also a trick that will work in some situations if you want to perform pattern matching without using the pin operator:
x = 10
12 = x
In the second line, you put the variable on the right hand side. I think the rule can be stated like this: On the right hand side of the pattern match operator(=), variables are always evaluated, i.e. replaced with their values. On the left hand side variables are always assigned to--unless the pin operator is used, in which case a pinned variable is replaced by its current value and then pattern matched against the right hand side. As a result, it's probably more accurate to call Elixir's = operator a hybrid assignment/pattern match operator.
You can imagine x = x + 1 being rewritten by the compiler to something like x2 = x1 + 1.
This is pretty close to how it works. It's not a simple index number like I used here, but the concept is the same. The variables seen by the BEAM are immutable, and there is no rebinding going on at that level.
In Erlang programs, you'll find code like X2 = X1 + 1 all over. There are downsides to both approaches. José Valim made a conscious choice to allow rebinding of variables when he designed Elixir, and he wrote a blog post comparing the two approaches and the different bugs you run the risk of:
http://blog.plataformatec.com.br/2016/01/comparing-elixir-and-erlang-variables/
During the pattern matching, the values on the right of the match are assigned to their matched variables on the left:
iex(1)> {x, y} = {1, 2}
{1, 2}
iex(2)> x
1
iex(3)> y
2
On the right hand side, the values of the variables prior to the match are used. On the left, the variables are set.
You can force the left side to use a variable's value too, with the ^ pin operator:
iex(4)> x = 1
1
iex(5)> ^x = x + 1
** (MatchError) no match of right hand side value: 2
This fails because it's equivalent to 1 = 1 + 1, which is the failure condition you were expecting.
Closed. This question needs debugging details. It is not currently accepting answers.
Edit the question to include desired behavior, a specific problem or error, and the shortest code necessary to reproduce the problem. This will help others answer the question.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
my question is simple... every reference I find in books and on the internet for learning R programming is presented in a very linear way with no context. When I try and learn things like functions, I see the code and my brain just freezes because it's looking for something to relate these R terms to and I have no frame of reference. I have a PhD and did a lot of statistics for my dissertation but that was years ago when we were using different programming languages and when it comes to R, I don't know why I can't get this into my head. Is there someone who can explain in plain english an example of this simple code? So for example:
above <- function(x, n){
use <- x > n
x[use]
}
x <- 1:20
above(x, 12)
## [1] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
I'm trying to understand what's going on in this code but simply don't. As a result, I could never just write this code on my own because I don't have the language in my head that explains what is happening with this. I get stuck at the first line:
above <- function(x, n) {
Can someone just explain this code sample in plain English so I have some kind of context for understanding what I'm looking at and why I'm doing what I'm doing in this code? And what I mean by plain English is, walking through the code, step by step and not just repeating the official terms from R like vector and function and array and all these other things, but telling me, in a common sense way, what this means.
Since your background ( phd in statsitics) the best way to understand this
is in mathematics words.
Mathematically speaking , you are defining a parametric function named above that extracts all element from a vector x above a certain value n. You are just filtering the set or the vector x.
In sets notation you can write something like :
above:{x,n} --> {y in x ; y>n}
Now, Going through the code and paraphrasing it (in the left the Math side , in the right its equivalent in R):
Math R
---------------- ---------------------
above: (x,n) <---> above <- function(x, n)
{y in x ; y>n} <---> x[x > n]
So to wrap all the statments together within a function you should respect a syntax :
function_name <- function(arg1,arg2) { statements}
Applying the above to this example (we have one statement here) :
above <- function(x,n) { x[x>n]}
Finally calling this function is exactly the same thing as calling a mathematical function.
above(x,2)
ok I will try, if this is too detailed let me know, but I tried to go really slowly:
above <- function(x, n)
this defines a function, which is just some procedure which produces some output given some input, the <- means assign what is on the right hand side to what is on the left hand side, or in other words put everything on the right into the object on the left, so for example container <- 1 puts 1 into the container, in this case we put a function inside the object above,
function(x, n) everything in the paranthesis specifys what inputs the function takes, so this one takes two variables x and n,
now we come to the body of the function which defines what it does with the inputs x and n, the body of the function is everything inside the curley braces:
{
use <- x > n
x[use]
}
so let's explain that piece by piece:
use <- x > n
this part again puts whats on the right side into the object on the left, and what is happening on the right hand side? a comparison returning TRUE if x is bigger than n and FALSE if x is equal to or smaller then n, so if x is 5 and n is 3 the result will be TRUE, and this value will get stored inside use, so use contains TRUE now, now if we have more than one value inside x than every value inside x will get compared to n, so for example if x = [1, 2, 3] and n = 2
than we have
1 > 2 FALSE
2 > 2 FALSE
3 > 2 TRUE
, so use will contain FALSE, FALSE, TRUE
x[use]
now we are taking a part of x, the square brackets specify which parts of x we want, so in my example case x has 3 elements and use has 3 elements if we combine them we have:
x use
1 FALSE
2 FALSE
3 TRUE
so now we say I dont want 1,2 but i want 3 and the result is 3
so now we have defined the function, now we call it, or in normal words we use it:
x <- 1:20
above(x, 12)
first we assign the numbers 1 through 20 to x, and then we tell the function above to execute (do everything inside its curley braces with the inputs x = 1:20 and n = 12, so in other words we do the following:
above(x, 12)
execute the function above with the inputs x = 1:20 and n = 12
use <- 1:20 > 12
compare 12 to every number from 1:20 and return for each comparison TRUE if the number is in fact bigger than 12 and FALSE if otherwise, than store all the results inside use
x[use]
now give me the corresponding elements of x for which the vector use contains TRUE
so:
x use
1 FALSE
2 FALSE
3 FALSE
4 FALSE
5 FALSE
6 FALSE
7 FALSE
8 FALSE
9 FALSE
10 FALSE
11 FALSE
12 FALSE
13 TRUE
14 TRUE
15 TRUE
16 TRUE
17 TRUE
18 TRUE
19 TRUE
20 TRUE
so we get the numbers 13:20 back as a result
I'll give it a crack too. A few basic points that should get you going in the right direction.
1) The idea of a function. Basically, a function is reusable code. Say I know that in my analysis for some bizarre reason I will often want to add two numbers, multiply them by a third, and divide them by a fourth. (Just suspend disbelief here.) So one way I could do that would just be to write the operation over and over, as follows:
(75 + 93)*4/18
(847 + 3)*3.1415/2.7182
(999 + 380302)*-6901834529/2.5
But that's tedious and error-prone. (What happens if I forget a parenthesis?) Alternatively, I can just define a function that takes whatever numbers I feed into it and carries out the operation. In R:
stupidMath <- function(a, b, c, d){
result <- (a + b)*c/d
}
That code says "I'd like to store this series of commands and attach them to the name "stupidMath." That's called defining a function, and when you define a function, the series of commands is just stored in memory---it doesn't actually do anything until you "call" it. "Calling" it is just ordering it to run, and when you do so, you give it "arguments" ---the stuff in the parentheses in the first line are the arguments it expects, i.e., in my example, it wants four distinct pieces of data, which will be called 'a', 'b', 'c', and 'd'.
Then it'll do the things it's supposed to do with whatever you give it. "The things it's supposed to do" is the stuff in the curly brackets {} --- that's the "body" of the function, which describes what to do with the arguments you give it. So now, whenever you want to carry that mathematical operation you can just "call" the function. To do the first computation, for example, you'd just write stupidMath(75, 93, 4, 18) Then the function gets executed, treating 75 as 'a', 83 as 'b', and so forth.
In your example, the function is named "above" and it takes two arguments, denoted 'x' and 'n'.
2) The "assignment operator": R is unique among major programming languages in using <- -- that's equivalent to = in most other languages, i.e., it says "the name on the left has the value on the right." Conceptually, it's just like how a variable in algebra works.
3) so the "body" of the function (the stuff in the curly brackets) first assigns the name "use" to the expression x > n. What's going on there. Well, an expression is something that the computer evaluates to get data. So remember that when you call the function, you give it values for x and n. The first thing this function does is figures out whether x is greater than n or less than n. If it's greater than n, it evaluates the expression x > n as TRUE. Otherwise, FALSE.
So if you were to define the function in your example and then call it with above(10, 5), then the first line of the body would set the local variable (don't worry right now about what a 'local' variable is) 'use' to be 'TRUE'. This is a boolean value.
Then the next line of the function is a "filter." Filtering is a long topic in R, but basically, R things of everything as a "vector," that is, a bunch of pieces of data in a row. A vector in R can be like a vector in linear algebra, i.e., (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 99) is a vector, but it can also be of stuff other than numbers. For now let's just focus on numbers.
The wacky thing about R (one of the many wacky things about R) is that it treats a single number (a "scalar" in linear algebra terms) just as a vector with only one item in it.
Ok, so why did I just go into that? Because in lots of places in R, a vector and a scalar are interchangable.
So in your example code, instead of giving a scalar for the first argument, when we call the function we've given 'above' a vector for its first argument. R likes vectors. R really likes vectors. (Just talk to R people for a while. They're all obsessed with doing every goddmamn thing in terms of a vector.) So it's no problem to pass a vector for the first argument. But what that means is that the variable 'use' is going to be a vector too. Specifically, 'use' is going to be a vector of booleans, i.e., of TRUE or FALSE for each individual value of X.
To take a simpler version: suppose you said:
mynums <- c(5, 10)
myresult <- above(mynums, 7)
when the code runs, the first thing it's going to do is define that 'use' variable. But x is a vector now, not a scalar (the c(5,10) code said "make a vector with two elements, and fill them with the numbers '5' and '10'), so R's going to go ahead and carry out the comparison for each element of x. Since 5 is less than 7 and 10 is greater than 7, use becomes the two item-vector of boolean values (FALSE, TRUE)
Ok, now we can talk about filtering. So a vector of boolean values is called a 'logical vector.' And the code x[use] says "filter x by the stuff in the variable use." When you tell R to filter something by a logical vector, it spits back out the elements of the thing being filtered which correspond to the values of 'TRUE'
So in the example just given:
mynums <- c(5, 10)
myresult <- above(mynums, 7)
the value of myresult will just be 10. Why? Because the function filtered 'x' by the logical vector 'use,' 'x' was (5, 10), and 'use' was (FALSE, TRUE); since the second element of the logical was the only true, you only got the second element of x.
And that gets assigned to the variable myresult because myresult <- above(mynums, 7) means "assign the name myresult to the value of above(mynums, 7)"
voila.
I usually have no problem with vectorization in r, but I am having a tough time in the example below where there are both iterative and non-iterative components in the for loop.
In the code below, I have a calculation that I have to perform based on a set of constants (Dini), a vector of values (Xs), where the ith value of the output vector (Ys) is also dependent on i-1 value:
Dini=128 #constant
Xs=c(6.015, 5.996, 5.989, 5.911, 5.851, 5.851, 5.858, 5.851)
Y0=125.73251 #starting Y value
Ys=c(Y0) #starting of output vector, first value is known
for (Vi in Xs[2:length(Xs)]){
ytm1=Ys[length(Ys)]
y=(955.74301-2*((Dini+ytm1-Vi)^2-ytm1^2)^0.5+2*ytm1*acos(ytm1/(Dini+ytm1-Vi)))/pi/2
Ys=c(Ys, y)
}
df=data.frame(Xs, Ys)
df
Xs Ys
1 6.015 125.7325
2 5.996 125.7273
3 5.989 125.7251
4 5.911 125.7036
5 5.851 125.6859
6 5.851 125.6849
7 5.858 125.6868
8 5.851 125.6850
For this case, where there is a mix of both iterative and non iterative components in the for loop, my mind has got twisted in a non-vectorized knot.
Any suggestions?
You might want to look into use Reduce in this case. For example
Ys<-Reduce(function(prev, cur) {
(955.74301-2*((Dini+prev-cur)^2-prev^2)^0.5 + 2*prev*acos(prev/(Dini+prev-cur)))/pi/2
}, Xs, init=Y0, accumulate=T)[-1]
From the ?Reduce help page: "Reduce uses a binary function to successively combine the elements of a given vector and a possibly given initial value." This makes it easier to create vectors where a given value depends on a previous value.
i want to know is it possible to validate that deviding two number has remaining zero in result or not?
for example dividing number 4 on number two has zero in remaining.
4/2=0 (this is true)
but 4/3=1 (this is not true)
is there any expression for validation such case?
Better Question :
Is There any validation expression to validate this sentence ?
Remainder is zero
thank you
You can use a Modulo operator. The modulo operation finds the remainder of division of one number by another
y mod x
5 mod 2 =1 (2x2=4, 5-4=1)
9 mod 3 = 0 (3*3=9)
You can think of it, how many times does x fit in y and then take the remainder.
In computing the modulo operator is integrated in most programming languages, along with division, substraction etc. Check modulo and then your language on google (probably its mod).
This is called the modulo function. It essentially gives the remainder of a division of two integer number. So you can test for the modulo funtion returning zero. For example, in Python you would write
if a % b == 0:
# a can be divided by b with zero remainder