Group Abstract

Message Boards

WOLFRAM COMMUNITY

4.8K Views

5 Replies

6 Total Likes

View groups...

Follow this post

Share this post:

GROUPS:

Data Science Wolfram Language

Association Pattern Tests in Function Signatures

Chase Turner

Chase Turner, Halberg Chronobiology Center, University of Minnesota

Posted 2 years ago

Is it possible to specialize pattern tests for `f` such that the three `VerificationTests` (below) succeed? Additionally, is there a performance and tuning guide specifically for data science pipelines that process large sets of `Association`? For example, is it possible to Compile functions whose arguments include `Association`? f[assoc_ : Asssociation[___Rule[_String, _TemporalData]]] := "String->TemporalData"; f[assoc_ : Asssociation[___Rule[_Symbol, _TemporalData]]] := "Symbol->TemporalData"; f[assoc_ : Asssociation[___Rule]] := "_->_"; With[{ts1 = TimeSeries[{1, 2}], ts2 = TimeSeries[-{1, 2}], v = VerificationTest}, {VerificationTest[f@<\|"a" -> ts1, "b" -> ts2\|>, "String->TemporalData"] , VerificationTest[f@<\|a -> ts1, b -> ts2\|>, "Symbol->TemporalData"] , VerificationTest[f@<\|a -> ts1, "b" -> ts2\|>, "_->_"] }] //TableForm Attachments: Associations-Pat...nb

Is it possible to specialize pattern tests for f such that the three VerificationTests (below) succeed? Additionally, is there a performance and tuning guide specifically for data science pipelines that process large sets of Association? For example, is it possible to Compile functions whose arguments include Association?

 f[assoc_ : Asssociation[___Rule[_String, _TemporalData]]] := 
  "String->TemporalData";
f[assoc_ : Asssociation[___Rule[_Symbol, _TemporalData]]] := 
  "Symbol->TemporalData";
f[assoc_ : Asssociation[___Rule]] := "_->_";

With[{ts1 = TimeSeries[{1, 2}], ts2 = TimeSeries[-{1, 2}], 
  v = VerificationTest},
 {VerificationTest[f@<|"a" -> ts1, "b" -> ts2|>, 
   "String->TemporalData"]
  , VerificationTest[f@<|a -> ts1, b -> ts2|>, 
   "Symbol->TemporalData"]
  , VerificationTest[f@<|a -> ts1, "b" -> ts2|>, "_->_"] }] //TableForm

POSTED BY: Chase Turner

5 Replies

Sort By:

Chase Turner

Chase Turner, Halberg Chronobiology Center, University of Minnesota

Posted 2 years ago

Jason -- thank you again for your help earlier! Two more follow on questions relative to the attached notebook with VerificationTests: Is it possible to re-write keyToString so it is Listable and thereby ready for pipelining into Parallelize? When Keys are already _Strings, are the pattern tests returning the unaltered argument useful, or a runtime headache to evaluate before jumping over to the non-String case? keyToString[rule : Rule[_String, _]] := rule; keyToString[rule : Rule[b_, c_]] := Rule[ToString@b, c]; keyToString[rules : {___Rule }] := keyToString /@ rules; keyToString[rulesList : {{___Rule } ...}] := keyToString /@ rulesList; keyToString[assoc : HoldPattern[Association[Rule[_String, _] ...]]] := assoc; keyToString[assoc : HoldPattern[Association[Rule[_, _] ...]]] := AssociationThread[ToString /@ Keys@assoc, Values@assoc]; keyToString[ assocList : {HoldPattern[Association[Rule[_, _] ...]] ...}] := keyToString /@ assocList; (UNKNOWN) keyToString::narg = "Warning: argument is not a Rule, {Rule...}, Association, or \ {Association...}"; keyToString[unknown_] := Block[{}, Message[keyToString::narg]; unknown]; Attachments: Associations-Pat...nb

Jason -- thank you again for your help earlier! Two more follow on questions relative to the attached notebook with VerificationTests:

Is it possible to re-write keyToString so it is Listable and thereby ready for pipelining into Parallelize?

When Keys are already _Strings, are the pattern tests returning the unaltered argument useful, or a runtime headache to evaluate before jumping over to the non-String case?

keyToString[rule : Rule[_String, _]] := rule;
keyToString[rule : Rule[b_, c_]] := Rule[ToString@b, c];
keyToString[rules : {___Rule }] := keyToString /@ rules;
keyToString[rulesList : {{___Rule } ...}] := 
  keyToString /@ rulesList;
keyToString[assoc : HoldPattern[Association[Rule[_String, _] ...]]] :=
   assoc;
keyToString[assoc : HoldPattern[Association[Rule[_, _] ...]]] := 
  AssociationThread[ToString /@ Keys@assoc, Values@assoc];
keyToString[
   assocList : {HoldPattern[Association[Rule[_, _] ...]] ...}] := 
  keyToString /@ assocList;
(*UNKNOWN*)
keyToString::narg = 
  "Warning: argument is not a Rule, {Rule...}, Association, or \
{Association...}";
keyToString[unknown_] := 
  Block[{}, Message[keyToString::narg]; unknown];

POSTED BY: Chase Turner

Chase Turner

Chase Turner, Halberg Chronobiology Center, University of Minnesota

Posted 2 years ago

Thank you!!!

POSTED BY: Chase Turner

Eric Rimbey

Posted 2 years ago

POSTED BY: Eric Rimbey

Jason Biggs

Jason Biggs, Wolfram Research

Posted 2 years ago

Fixing the typo `Asssociation` -> `Association` the code still fails because the pattern `___Rule[_String, _TemporalData]` does not match a sequence of rules with string keys and temporal data values (it is the same thing as `(___Rule)[_String, _TemporalData]`). Instead you want `Rule[_String, _TemporalData] ...` See `RepeatedNull` versus `BlankNullSequence` for more information. Any time you use `Association` in a pattern it is good to use `HoldPattern` to avoid evaluation, so this is how I would rewrite your definitions: ClearAll @ f; f[assoc:HoldPattern[Association[Rule[_String, _TemporalData]...]]] := "String->TemporalData"; f[assoc:HoldPattern[Association[Rule[_Symbol, _TemporalData]...]]] := "Symbol->TemporalData"; f[assoc:HoldPattern[Association[___Rule]]] := "_->_"; Then your tests all pass.

POSTED BY: Jason Biggs

Eric Rimbey

Posted 2 years ago

POSTED BY: Eric Rimbey

Reply to this discussion

Reply Preview

Attachments

Remove Add a file to this post

Follow this discussion

or Discard

Feedback