How do I "tidy up" error terms in a matrix?

asked 2012-11-12 13:20:49 +0200

GaryMak
107 ●9 ●14 ●25

Hi - I have some calculation results in the form of a complex Gram matrix which are all supposed to be integers (or "obvious" algebraic numbers which I know about). However inevitably in the course of creating them as inner products, some "error" terms arise which are of a size of the order of 10^-16 (real and/or complex). Is there an easy way to "clean up" my matrix with some sort of threshold, so that things which differ from a user-specified list of algebraic numbers by less than a tiny amount like 10^-15, are assumed to be the relevant algebraic number? At the moment I'm having to do it by a bunch of hideous if-statement contortions but I'm sure there's a better way! Many thanks in advance for any help.

edit retag flag offensive close merge delete

Comments

I've wondered similar things myself. It would be nice to have something like `fnormal` in Maple. Can you apply `round` in some way using a `map` command to help. For example, `round(1+10.^(-16),5)` gives `1.0`.

calc314 ( 2012-11-12 13:47:18 +0200 )edit

thanks - as an example for future reference, I used John's suggestion below in the following form: mat.apply_map( lambda x: (d*abs(x)^2).round()/d ); where I knew that the largest denominator for the abs values was d (one has to be a little more careful with complex entries)

GaryMak ( 2012-11-12 14:24:02 +0200 )edit

add a comment

2 Answers

Sort by » oldest newest most voted

answered 2012-11-13 18:13:12 +0200

Volker Braun
3281 ●11 ●30 ●75

Matrices over ComplexField don't implement round(), unfortunately. But the following variant of John's answer works:

sage: mat = matrix(3, 3, [2+1e-15+i*1e-15]*9)
sage: mat.change_ring(CDF).round()
[2.0 2.0 2.0]
[2.0 2.0 2.0]
[2.0 2.0 2.0]

edit flag offensive delete link

Comments

I applied 'real()' and then 'round()' in my answer.

John Palmieri ( 2012-11-13 23:34:22 +0200 )edit

Agreed. I just wanted to point out that matrices over some rings have already a round() method.

Volker Braun ( 2012-11-14 00:01:03 +0200 )edit

thanks Volker - that's helpful.

GaryMak ( 2012-11-15 05:14:52 +0200 )edit

add a comment

answered 2012-11-12 13:45:56 +0200

John Palmieri

8551 ●19 ●71 ●186 http://www.math.washin...

This will clean things up if the entries are integers. If the entries differ by small amounts from known algebraic numbers, that's more complicated.

sage: mat = matrix(3, 3, [2+1e-15+i*1e-15]*9)
sage: mat
[2.00000000000000 + 1.00000000000000e-15*I 2.00000000000000 + 1.00000000000000e-15*I 2.00000000000000 + 1.00000000000000e-15*I]
[2.00000000000000 + 1.00000000000000e-15*I 2.00000000000000 + 1.00000000000000e-15*I 2.00000000000000 + 1.00000000000000e-15*I]
[2.00000000000000 + 1.00000000000000e-15*I 2.00000000000000 + 1.00000000000000e-15*I 2.00000000000000 + 1.00000000000000e-15*I]
sage: mat.apply_map(lambda x: x.real().round())
[2 2 2]
[2 2 2]
[2 2 2]
sage: mat_Z = mat.apply_map(lambda x: x.real().round())
sage: mat_Z.base_ring()
Integer Ring

edit flag offensive delete link

Comments

thanks John - that's certainly a thousand times neater than the mess I had before! The algebraic number thing is almost too good to be true, but maybe someone out there knows a way ... (obviously the list would have to be "restricted" in the sense that the abs vals of the entries would have to be separated by more than twice the error term or something, etc etc)

GaryMak ( 2012-11-12 14:05:52 +0200 )edit

add a comment

Your Answer

Please start posting anonymously - your entry will be published after you log in or create a new account.

Add Answer

How do I "tidy up" error terms in a matrix?

Comments

2 Answers

Comments

Comments

Your Answer

Question Tools

Stats

Related questions

How do I "tidy up" error terms in a matrix? edit

Comments

2 Answers

Comments

Comments

Your Answer

Question Tools

Stats

Related questions

How do I "tidy up" error terms in a matrix?