## Simplifying function output not exactly as expected

simplify a expression matlab

simplify symbolic expression

matlab simplify transfer function

matlab simplify system of equations

matlab simplify trig functions

matlab simplify fraction

how to simplify matrix in matlab

I am trying to write a function that will simplify an arbitrary list of boolean expressions, but my function fails certain tests.

(defn sim [expression] (if (some true? expression) true (if (= (count expression) 2) (if (some false? expression) false (if (map simple-symbol? expression) (if (= (count expression) 2) (drop 1 expression) expression))) (if (some simple-symbol? (drop 1 expression)) (filter simple-symbol? expression)))))

When I call using `(sim '(or x false))`

I expect the output to be `(x)`

, but instead it returns `(or x)`

. Conversely, when I call using `(sim '(or x))`

my output is `(x)`

as expected.

How about something along these lines? This is only for `or`

, but I'm sure we can do the same for `and`

and other boolean operators.

(defn simplify-or [exp] (let [op (first exp) args (rest exp)] (when (= op 'or) (let [nf-args (filter #(symbol? %) args)] (if (some true? args) true (case (count nf-args) 0 false 1 (first nf-args) (concat (list op) nf-args)))))))

Results:

(simplify-or '(or false)) => false (simplify-or '(or true)) => true (simplify-or '(or x true y false)) => true (simplify-or '(or x y false)) => (or x y)

**my output is not simplified to one number,** results in the expected output. with the parameters for the variables. t = -120.07208, m = -0.80227, a = 0.77755, b = 0.00161, c = 1.46526E-6, d = 7.15449E-8, This is the expected behavior of the SIMPLIFY function in the Symbolic Math Toolbox. By default, the function tries to make as few assumptions about the symbolic variables as possible. Considering a simple example, the expression 'log(exp(x))' cannot always be simplified to the expression 'x'.

(defn simplify-or [[op & args]] (let [args-without-false (remove false? args)] (cond (some true? args-without-false) true (= 1 (count args-without-false)) args-without-false (empty? args-without-false) false :otherwise (conj args-without-false op)))) (simplify-or '(or x false y)) #=> (or x y) (simplify-or '(or x)) #=> (x) (simplify-or '(or x true y false)) #=> true (simplify-or '(or false false) #=> false

My concern is some inconsistency here, what is `(x)`

? why not just `x`

? The same way as we return just `true`

or `false`

.

**Macroeconomics Simplified: Understanding Keynesian and ,** Equation 6.3 shows that the national income or output can be allocated in one of the it must be the case that aggregate demand (spending) is exactly equal to output. By substituting Equations 6.2 and 6.3 into Equation 6.4, we get the following planned investment, and also, it is not to confuse with the national income This gives Sqrt[6] in the regular notebook, but Sqrt[2]*Sqrt[3] as output in the command line using Wolframscript. I've tried FullSimplify, Simplify, Evaluate, etc, yet nothing seems to simplify the answer in wolframscript.

(require '[clojure.walk :as w]) (defmulti dispatch first) (defmethod dispatch 'or [[op & args]] (if (contains? (into #{} args) true) true (case (count (remove false? args)) 0 false 1 (first (remove false? args)) (cons op (remove false? args))))) (defmethod dispatch 'and [[op & args]] (if (contains? (into #{} args) false) false (case (count (remove true? args)) 0 false 1 (first (remove true? args)) (cons op (remove true? args))))) (defmethod dispatch :default [x] x) (defn simplify [x] (prn (w/postwalk (fn [x] (if (and (list? x) (seq x)) (dispatch x) x)) x))) (simplify '(or x false)) (simplify '(or x (or y false) z false)) (simplify '(or x (or y false) (and z false))) (simplify '(or x false y)) (simplify '(or x)) (simplify '(or x (or x true y false))) (simplify '(or false false (and true true)))

**Why is the simplify function not simplifying?,** This is the expected behavior of the SIMPLIFY function in the Symbolic Math Toolbox. By default, the function tries to make as few assumptions about the Since Sqrt is a function, it must be defined with a branch cut (this is not a shortcoming of Mathematica, just a result of requiring functions to be single-valued). The cut used by Mathematica means that phases of complex arguments are moved into the interval before applying the rule .

**Simplifying Boolean Expressions and Conditionals,** It is alway possible to replace the pattern if (E) {return true;} else {return false;} by the any boolean expression E. We expect you to make this simplification in your code. Just as it is possible to simplify algebraic expressions by using rules like valid simplifications; for this reason, they are not included in the above table: However, it does not simplify the statement. Indeed, the result requires two evaluations of boolExp1 where the initial expression only required one! However, if at least one of boolExp2 or boolExp3 is true or false , then the boolean expression simplifications from above can lead to a simpler result.

**Software Management,** Boehm and his coworkers expect to provide new calibrations biennially as more data is effort was highly correlated with just the counts of the inputs and outputs. Gaffney's “simplified function point estimation method” does not use the three Just open the webpage, choose ONNX as the output format, check the onnx simplifier and then select your model to simplify. Python version. If the web version doesn't work well for you, you can install the Python version via pip (with python > 3.5): pip3 install onnx-simplifier Then. python3 -m onnxsim input_onnx_model output_onnx_model

**Circuit Simplification Examples | Boolean Algebra,** Read about Circuit Simplification Examples (Boolean Algebra) in our free Electronics Expect a Memory Revolution in 2020—It's a Big Leap from DDR4 to DDR5 Where these signals originate is of no concern in the task of gate reduction. For example, I'll write sub-expressions at the outputs of the first three gates:. Stroustrup Simplifying concepts N2906=0900096 5 have the structure you expected (the right functions, operators, etc. if your type was expressed as a template function). However, there are plenty of types that almost match a set of requirements. In the absence of concept maps, I have to use workarounds: