Slimming Down a Calculator Program - java

I'm planning on creating a calculator for physics that would run off of a few equations. But, I realized that it would be a lot of code.
With the equation v = x/t (just one of many I want to include) , there's already three possible equations.
v = x/t x = vt t = x/v
What I was planning to have the program do is:
-Ask the user what equation they're going to use
-Ask what variable is missing
-Solve for it with a matching equation
My question is whether or not there is a way I can format the code more efficiently. Without knowing how, it seems like running a lot of very similar code for each variant of an equation.
I'm planning to create this using multiple classes, if it isn't clear.

There's 2 approaches I can think of that would make the most sense.
The first more traditional way would be to make a bunch of classes for each kind of equation you wanted to include.
public class Velocity implements Equation{
public double solveT(double v, double x){
if(v != 0)
return x / v;
else
return 0; //or whatever value is appropriate
}
public double solveX(double v, double t){
return v * t;
}
public double solveV(double t, double x){
if(t != 0)
return x / t;
else
return 0; //or whatever value is appropriate
}
}
This keeps all of your different equations separate, and if you define an empty Equation interface you can substitute different Equation objects as needed. The drawback is that you'd have a lot of classes to keep track of, and you would have to make sure that the Equation object you're trying to call methods on is the correct instance, i.e. trying to call solveX() on a Density instance that doesn't have a solveX() method. However, having each class separate is a nice way to organize and debug.
The other approach is using Java8 lambdas:
interface twoTermEq{
double solve(double a, double b);
}
public class Calculator{
public double solveTwoTermEq(twoTermEq eq, double a, double v){
eq.solve(a, b);
}
}
public static void main(String[] args){
twoTermEq velSolveX = (t, v) -> return t * v;
twoTermEq velSolveT = (x, v) -> v != 0.0 ? return x / v : 0.0;
twoTermEq velSolveV = (x, t) -> t != 0.0 ? return x / t : 0.0;
//define as many equations as needed...
Calculator c = new Calculator();
//select which equation to run, collect user input
....
//do the calculation
double result = c.solveTwoTermEq(velSolveX, t, v);
}
This lets you define your equations all in one place and doesn't need a boatload of classes. You could similarly define interfaces for ThreeTermEq, FourTermEq, etc., as well as solveThreeTermEq(), solveFourTermEq(), etc. methods for the Calculator class. The drawback here is that it might become more difficult to maintain and organize, and I believe there's an upper limit on how big a class file can be; if a class file becomes too big it won't compile, which could happen if you've defined tons of equations.
For me the choice would come down to how I wanted to organize the code; if I wanted to only include a (relatively) small number of (relatively) simple equations, I would probably use lambdas. If I wanted to include every physics equation across as many physics topics as possible, I'd probably use classes.
Either way, there's going to have to be some similar code written for different permutations of an equation - I don't think there's really any way around that. You could try for a novel approach using a bunch of Objects to try to circumvent that, but I think that would be overwrought and not worth the effort; it's not like flipping variables around is hard.

You would probably be best off using some kind of symbolic math toolbox. Maple and MatLab are good languages/environments for working with equations, as they recognize symbolic math and can manipulate equations fairly easily. Java does not have any built in libraries for this, and it is difficult to find any libraries that would support a 'Computer Algebra System' to manipulate the equations for you. You might want to look at JAS (Java Algebra System), but I'm not sure that will do what you're looking to do. Most likey, you will need to solve for each variable by hand and build functions for each individual expression.
If you're sticking with Java, this is how I would go about it. In terms of code formatting, I would just create one Equation class that holds an array of all the variations of a given equation. The variations (i.e. V=I*R, I=V/R, R=V/I) would all be passed into the constructor for the class. A solve method could then be implemented that takes the requested variable to be solved for, the other variables and their values (distinguished by two arrays- one for characters and one for values)
Usage could be as follows:
Equation ohmsLaw = new Equation(new String[] {"V=I*R", "I=V/R", "R=V/I"});
double resistance = ohmsLaw.solve('R', new char[] {'I', 'V'}, new double[] {0.5, 12.0});
You would need to write a little bit of symbolic parsing, but that makes it fun, right?
May or may not have been the answer you were looking for, but hopefully it's some help. Good luck!

Related

Custom distance metric for DBSCAN in Apache Commons Math (v3.1 vs. v3.6)

I want to use Apache Commons Math's DBSCANClusterer<T extends Clusterable> to perform a clustering using the DBSCAN algorithm, but with a custom distance metric as my data points contain non-numerical values. This seems to have been easily achievable in the older version (note that the fully qualified name of this class is org.apache.commons.math3.stat.clustering.DBSCANClusterer<T> whereas it is org.apache.commons.math3.ml.clustering.DBSCANClusterer<T> for the current release), which has now been deprecated. In the older version, Clusterable would take a type-param, T, describing the type of the data points being clustered, and the distance between two points would be defined by one's implementation of Clusterable.distanceFrom(T), e.g.:
class MyPoint implements Clusterable<MyPoint> {
private String someStr = ...;
private double someDouble = ...;
#Override
public double distanceFrom(MyPoint p) {
// Arbitrary distance metric goes here, e.g.:
double stringsEqual = this.someStr.equals(p.someStr) ? 0.0 : 10000.0;
return stringsEqual + Math.sqrt(Math.pow(p.someDouble - this.someDouble, 2.0));
}
}
In the current release, Clusterable is no longer parameterized. This means that one has to come up with a way of representing one's (potentially non-numerical) data points as a double[] and return that representation from getPoint(), e.g.:
class MyPoint implements Clusterable {
private String someStr = ...;
private double someDouble = ...;
#Override
public double[] getPoint() {
double[] res = new double[2];
res[1] = someDouble; // obvious
res[0] = ...; // some way of representing someStr as a double required
return res;
}
}
And then provide an implementation of DistanceMeasure that defines the custom distance function in terms of the double[] representations of the two points being compared, e.g.:
class CustomDistanceMeasure implements DistanceMeasure {
#Override
public double compute(double[] a, double[] b) {
// Let's mimic the distance function from earlier, assuming that
// a[0] is different from b[0] if the two 'someStr' variables were
// different when their double representations were created.
double stringsEqual = a[0] == b[0] ? 0.0 : 10000.0;
return stringsEqual + Math.sqrt(Math.pow(a[1] - b[1], 2.0));
}
}
My data points are of the form (integer, integer, string, string):
class MyPoint {
int i1;
int i2;
String str1;
String str2;
}
And I want to use a distance function/metric that essentially says "if str1 and/or str2 differ for MyPoint mpa and MyPoint mpb, the distance is maximal, otherwise the distance is the Euclidean distance between the integers" as illustrated by the following snippet:
class Dist {
static double distance(MyPoint mpa, MyPoint mpb) {
if (!mpa.str1.equals(mpb.str1) || !mpa.str2.equals(mpb.str2)) {
return Double.MAX_VALUE;
}
return Math.sqrt(Math.pow(mpa.i1 - mpb.i1, 2.0) + Math.pow(mpa.i2 - mpb.i2, 2.0));
}
}
Questions:
How do I represent a String as a double in order to enable the above distance metric in the current release (v3.6.1) of Apache Commons Math? String.hashCode() is insufficient as hash code collisions would cause different strings to be considered equal. This seems like an unsolvable problem as I'm essentially trying to create a unique mapping from an infinite set of strings to a finite set of numerical values (64bit double).
As (1) seems impossible, am I misunderstanding how to use the library? If yes, were did I take a wrong turn?
Is my only alternative to use the deprecated version for this kind of distance metric? If yes, (3a) why would the designers choose to make the library less general? Perhaps in favor of speed? Perhaps to get rid of the self-reference in class MyPoint implements Clusterable<MyPoint> which some might consider bad design? (I realize that this might be too opinionated, so please disregard it if that is the case). For the commons-math experts: (3b) what downsides are there to using the deprecated version other than forward compatibility (the deprecated version will be removed in 4.0)? Is it slower? Perhaps even incorrect?
Note: I am aware of ELKI which is apparently popular among a set of SO users, but it does not fit my needs as it is marketed as a command-line and GUI tool rather than a Java library to be included in third-party applications:
You can even embed ELKI into your application (if you accept the
AGPL-3 license), but we currently do not (yet) recommend to do so,
because the API is still changing substantially. [...]
ELKI is not designed as embeddable library. It can be used, but it is
not designed to be used this way. ELKI has tons of options and
functionality, and this comes at a price, both in runtime (although it
can easily outperform R and Weka, for example!) memory usage and in
particular in code complexity.
ELKI was designed for research in data mining algorithms, not for
making them easy to include in arbitrary applications. Instead, if you
have a particular problem, you should use ELKI to find out which
approach works good, then reimplement that approach in an optimized
manner for your problem (maybe even in C++ then, to further reduce
memory and runtime).

Implementing nonlinear optimization with nonlinear inequality constraints with java

How do I implement a nonlinear optimization with nonlinear constraints in java? I am currently using org.apache.commons.math3.optim.nonlinear.scalar.noderiv, and I have read that none of the optimizers (such as the one I am currently working with, SimplexOptimizer) take constraints by default, but that instead one must map the constrained parameters to unconstrained ones by implementing the MultivariateFunctionPenaltyAdapter or MultivariateFunctionMappingAdapter classes. However, as far as I can tell, even using these wrappers, one can still only implement linear or "simple" constraints. I am wondering if there is any way to include nonlinear inequality constraints?
For example, suppose that My objective function is a function of 3 parameters: a,b,and c (depending on them non-linearly) and that additionally these parameters are subject to the constraint that ab
Any advice that would solve the problem using just apache commons would be great, but any suggestions for extending existing classes or augmenting the package would also be welcome of course.
My best attempt so far at implementing the COBYLA package is given below:
public static double[] Optimize(double[][] contractDataMatrix,double[] minData, double[] maxData,double[] modelData,String modelType,String weightType){
ObjectiveFunction objective = new ObjectiveFunction(contractDataMatrix,modelType,weightType);
double rhobeg = 0.5;
double rhoend = 1.0e-6;
int iprint = 3;
int maxfun = 3500;
int n = modelData.length;
Calcfc calcfc = new Calcfc(){
#Override
public double Compute(int n, int m, double[] x, double[] con){
con[0]=x[3]*x[3]-2*x[0]*x[1];
System.out.println("constraint: "+(x[3]*x[3]-2*x[0]*x[1]));
return objective.value(x);
}
};
COBYLAExitStatus result = COBYLA.FindMinimum(calcfc, n, 1, modelData, rhobeg, rhoend, iprint, maxfun);
return modelData;
}
The issue is that I am still getting illegal values in my optimization. As you can see, within the anonymous override of the compute function, I am printing out the value of my constraint. The result is often negative. But shouldn't this value be constrainted to be non-negative?
EDIT: I found the bug in my code, which was unrelated to the optimizer itself but rather my implementation.
Best,
Paul
You might want to consider an optimizer that is not available in Apache Commons Math. COBYLA is a derivative-free method for relatively small optimization problems (less than 100 variables) with nonlinear constraints. I have ported the original Fortran code to Java, the source code is here.

Solving two algebraic equations in java

I have two equations that need to be evaluated in java
y=(x+1)*2-3
y=5
These equations are dynamic in nature
y= x*8x6-5*5
y= 3
y is known in these equations, I need to determine the value of x
What is the best and easy way to write a program in java?
It seems that there are a couple of ways to go about this. My first thought (as always is overly complex and most likely not worth doing except for fun), is to use a create a grammar to parse out the order of operations, things that can evaluate to variables vs constants, etc. Then programatically solve the equations. This however is not something easily done. If this is for a compiler class, this might be worth looking at otherwise ignore it.
My second thought was to just use brute force. Though you will need to figure out what to do with negative values of x.
public int solve(int y){
int x=0;
while(y>(x+1)*2-3)
x++;
}
Some years later, hope this helps someone, to make this a lot simplier i will use the library exp4j (https://www.objecthunter.net/exp4j/) and the IDE netbeans 8.2 (https://netbeans.org/).
Create a frame like this
Later on the button add the code:
try {
net.objecthunter.exp4j.Expression e = new ExpressionBuilder(txtFunc.getText())
.variables("x")
.build()
.setVariable("x", Double.parseDouble(txtVar.getText()));
double result = e.evaluate();
txtRes.setText("" + result);
} catch (Exception e) {
JOptionPane.showMessageDialog(null, "Revisa la función o la variable, Posibles errores de operación: División entre 0");
}
Note: this is intended to evaluate "x"
So doing specifically that way is going to be little bit complicated, so we are going to do some math, if 5 is the value of the function evaluated then we isolate the value of "x". x=(y+1)/2 then re-evaluate, x=(5+1)/2=3, x=3 and with the code verify that this is actually the answer.
Comprobation
Same thing goes with the other function. (sorry for my technical english)
If by saying the equations are "dynamic" we are to infer that you are trying to construct a program to solve for x in an arbitrary algebraic equation (or set of equations), that's well beyond the scope of this forum. There are entire software packages designed to do things like that.

Execution priority of expressions

In the following line of code:
x = x.times(x).plus(y);
in what order are these expressions going to be executed?
Will it be like:
x = (x + y)*x
or x = (x^2) + y,
or something else and why?
Links to documentation about the specific subject will be highly appreciated as I had no luck with my search. Apparently I don't know where to look at and what to look for.
Thank you.
These are methods; the fact that they are called "plus" and "times" doesn't mean that they'll necessarily follow the behaviour of the built-in + and * operators.
So x.times(x) will be executed first. This will return a reference to an object, on which plus(y) will then be executed. The return value of this will then be assigned to x. It's equivalent to:
tmp = x.times(x);
x = tmp.plus(y);
Here's a link to a documentation which most likely contains the required answer (probably at 15.7). It's highly technical and verbose but not inaccessible to most people (I believe).
However, it seems that you're just starting programming, so you'll be better off reading other answers here, and programming more to get an intuitive feel (not exactly a 'feel', as it's systematic and rigourous) of the order of operations etc...
Don't be afraid to write "throw-away" code (which you can incidentally save too) to find out things you don't know if you don't know where else to look for the answer. You can always google more intensively or dive through the language specs at a latter date. You'll learn faster this way. :)
One simple way to find out is to write something like this:
class Number{
private int number;
public Number(int x){
number = x;
}
public Number times(Number x){
System.Out.PrintLn("times");
return number * x;
}
public Number plus(Number x){
System.Out.PrintLn("plus");
return number + x;
}
}
Method chains get executed from left to right, with each method using the result from the previous method, so it will be x = (x^2) + y.
What you're referring to in the algebraic expressions is operator precedence - evaluating multiplications before addition, for example. The Java compiler knows about these rules for expressions, and will generate code to evaluate them as you expect.
For method calling, there are no "special rules". When given x = x.times(x).plus(y); the compiler only knows that to evaluate x.times(x).plus(y), it first needs to know what x is, so it can call times on it. Likewise, it then needs to know what x.times(x) is so it can call the plus method on that result. Hence, this type of statement is parsed left to right : (x * x) + y.
Some languages allow the creation of functions that are "infix" with user supplied precedence. (such as Haskell : See http://www.haskell.org/tutorial/functions.html, section "Fixity declarations"). Java is, alas, not one of them.
It's going to be executed in left-to-right order, as
x = (x.times(x)).plus(y)
The other way:
x = x.(times(x).plus(y))
doesn't even make sense to me. You would have to rewrite it as
x = x.times(x.plus(y))
to make sense of it, but the fact that the second x is contained within times() while the y is outside it rules out that interpretation.
The reason the documentation doesn't say anything about this is probably that such expressions follow the normal rules for how a statement like a.b().c().d() is evaluated: from left to right. We start with a and call the function b() on it. Then, we call c() on the result of that call, and we call d() on the result of c(). Hence, x.times(x).plus(y) will first perform the multiplication, then the addition.

Is an if-else tree the best way to go in the following case?

What I'm doing:
I'm creating a simple calculator in Java, that reads a string that has been written using postfix notation (for example: 3 4 +). It then takes the string and starts reading it from left to right. It stores each number it finds and then applies the following operator. For example: 3 4 + --> store 3, store 4, run 3 + 4 and store result.
What I need help with:
In what way characters should be checked against pre-defined operators (if(c == '/') etc). What alternatives are there in my case to an if-else tree, and which one should I choose if I want to be able to add new operators with minimum effort (and minimum toll on performance). What is generally considered good practice?
If this is a calculator for humans to use, stop thinking about performance (as in execution speed). No human will ever come close to noticing the difference between an if-tree and any other implementation.
That said, you might want to try implementing some kind of Operator class, that knows how to apply itself to arguments, and then use a hash from the operator name (strings like "+", "-", "*" and so on) to an appropriate instance.
If you encapsulate your operations as objects, you can often use a data structure to replace a switch-like statement and hopefully will simply adding operations in the future.
For example, this is one approach for encapsulating operations as objects: using an Enum to represent the operations:
http://download.oracle.com/javase/1.5.0/docs/guide/language/enums.html
public enum Operation {
PLUS { double eval(double x, double y) { return x + y; } },
MINUS { double eval(double x, double y) { return x - y; } },
TIMES { double eval(double x, double y) { return x * y; } },
DIVIDE { double eval(double x, double y) { return x / y; } };
// Do arithmetic op represented by this constant
abstract double eval(double x, double y);
}
You could extend this example to associate a symbol with each operation and provide a static method to look up the operation associated with symbol. [[ I'm torn about this mixing UI/view code with the logic/domain code, but you mentioned you want simple, so perhaps this is okay for your program.]]
If you encapsulate your operations as objects, then you can consider a data structure to replace switch-like code:
if there will be a lot of operations, consider building a hashmap to map symbols to operations.
if there are a small number of operations, it may be cheap enough to have a collection of all operations and simply iterate through all operations to ask each if they act on the user-provided symbol and use the first found.
I wouldn't worry about performance as the computer can parse/calculate the data 1 million times faster than you can type the formula (and that is not an exaguration)
The way I would approach it is to use if/else or use a switch statement
switch(ch) {
case '+':
break;
case '-':
break;
// etc.
}
What you are looking for is the Command Pattern implemented by a map with Character objects as key and instances implementing a handling interface as values.
I would do it by creating an Operator superclass, which is extended by single operations, follows an example (forgive me for errors, I'm not trying this).
abstract class Operator {
String simbol;
abstract Double calculate(Double firstOperand, Double secondOperand)
}
class Sum extends Operator {
simbol = "+";
Double calculate(Double firstOperand, Double secondOperand){
return firstOperand + secondOperand;
}
}
class OperatorRecognizer {
List<Operator> operators;
public Operator recognize(String readOperator){
for(Operator operator : operators){
if(operator.getSymbol().equals(readOperator)){
return operator;
}
}
}
}
While reading a line I would do it this way:
OperatorFactory.recognize(readOperator).calculate(firstOperand, secondOperand);
This way when you have to add a single operation you just add one class.
EDIT: lol ok, it seems others have said this same thing, I'll leave this here anyway ^^"
Interesting question. Like many people here, micro optimization causes more evil than good. But without throwing any design patten at you or idea for optimization, this is what I would do.
I will create am Enum for all operations. I will also create a member function in this enum that takes a var args parameter and a operation enum and iteratively apply the enum operation on the arguements.
I will also create an String utility class (for input processing), that Iterates thro all the operation enum values and performs a regular expression check on input string to identify the operation specified by a given string ( regex because I want to make sure of Postfix notation). Once it identifies the operation, then it delegates to the enum's member function to perform the operation.

Categories