mapSolution broken in R2019b?

1 次查看（过去 30 天）
Matt J
Matt J 2020-8-15
评论： Matt J 2020-9-1
In R2019a, the following code works as intended,
%% Define the variables
x=optimvar('x',{'x1','x2'},'LowerBound',[-100,-200]);
y=optimvar('y',1,3,'LowerBound',[0 0 0],'UpperBound',[+300,+400,+500]);
%% Define some constraints
C.inequ=2*sum(y)+sum(x)<=1000;
C.equ=5*sum(x)==100;
prob=optimproblem('Constraints',C,'Objective',sum(x)+sum(y));
idx=mapSolution(prob,1:5)
resulting in the output,
idx =
struct with fields:
x: [1 2]
y: [1 2 3]
Something must have been changed in R2019b/R2020a, however, because I instead get an error:
Not enough input arguments.
Error in optim.internal.problemdef.ProblemImpl/mapSolution
Error in test (line 12)
idx=mapSolution(prob,1:5)
Were there any intentional changes in the behavior of the mapSolution function, and if so how do I get the code above to work in current Matlab?
  3 个评论
显示 1更早的评论
Matt J
Matt J 2020-8-16
There is a qualifying Note there, however, showing that certain subsets of the input argument list are allowable... Why would the two-input combination no longer be allowable based on what's written there, and considering also that it clearly did work in R2019a?
Walter Roberson
Walter Roberson 2020-8-16
Darn, it is a .p file so we can't read it.

请先登录，再进行评论。

请先登录，再回答此问题。

采纳的回答

Paul Kerr-Delworth
Paul Kerr-Delworth 2020-8-28
Hi Matt and Walter,
Firstly Matt, many apologies that you've run into this unintended behavior. Also, many thanks to you both for looking into this and flagging it up.
What has happened here? The short answer is that mapSolution was made an internal function in R2019a and replaced with varindex. Once we made mapSolution internal, we repurposed it in R2019b leading to the internal error you encountered. We will tidy up the error and add a note in the documentation pointing you to varindex
Matt's original code works with varindex
%% Define the variables
x=optimvar('x',{'x1','x2'},'LowerBound',[-100,-200]);
y=optimvar('y',1,3,'LowerBound',[0 0 0],'UpperBound',[+300,+400,+500]);
%% Define some constraints
C.inequ=2*sum(y)+sum(x)<=1000;
C.equ=5*sum(x)==100;
prob=optimproblem('Constraints',C,'Objective',sum(x)+sum(y));
idx = varindex(prob);
Resulting in the output
idx =
struct with fields:
x: [1 2]
y: [3 4 5]
Also, varindex allows you to get the variable index by name, e.g.
idx = varindex(prob, 'y')
Resulting a double as the output
idx =
3 4 5
Matt, may I ask if you were aware of varindex? Also, is there anything in mapSolution that you are relying on that varindex doesn't provide?
Thanks again for flagging this and hope varindex helps!
Cheers,
Paul
Documentation for varindex:
https://uk.mathworks.com/help/optim/ug/optim.problemdef.optimizationproblem.varindex.html
  5 个评论
显示 3更早的评论
Paul Kerr-Delworth
Paul Kerr-Delworth 2020-9-1
编辑：Paul Kerr-Delworth 2020-9-1
Hi Matt,
Many thanks for the clarification, that's really helpful for us.
For a backwards compatible solution that can work, you can add your own version of varindex to the path as a separate function
function solstruct = varindex(prob)
if ~isa(prob, 'optim.problemdef.OptimizationProblem')
error('First input to VARINDEX must be an OptimizationProblem');
end
if verLessThan('matlab', '9.6')
error('This function is intended for R2017b - R2018b. Make this a separate function on the path.')
end
N = sum(structfun(@numel, prob.Variables));
solstruct = mapSolution(prob, 1:N);
end
Now for R2017b-R2018b, this function will be called as varindex doesn't exist. From 19a onwards the shipping OptimizationProblem method will be called as it is higher in the precedence order than your varindex.
https://uk.mathworks.com/help/matlab/matlab_prog/function-precedence-order.html
Would you be happy to move to varindex with this solution?
Cheers.
Paul
Matt J
Matt J 2020-9-1
Thanks,Paul. That looks great. And yes, varindex is what I would use.

请先登录，再进行评论。

更多回答（1 个）

Matt J
Matt J 2020-8-17
编辑：Matt J 2020-8-25
This seems to be a simple work-around,
idx=mapSolution(prob,1:5,[],[],[],[],[])
but I can't help wondering if it's really supposed to be required. It is very uncharacteristic of TMW-supplied commands to require trailing [] input arguments.
  1 个评论
Walter Roberson
Walter Roberson 2020-8-25
Internal code does not do detailed argument checking for performance reasons.

请先登录，再进行评论。

类别

在 Help Center 和 File Exchange 中查找有关 Morphological Operations 的更多信息

标签

产品

Community Treasure Hunt

Find the treasures in MATLAB Central and discover how the community can help you!

Start Hunting!

Translated by