You are right but it is a bit of serendipity What I wanted is (a*b+ b*c+c*a ) % c a b . it doesn't matter how the pairs are formed in the numerator ac+ba+cb is the same.
The objective is to have this sum divided by a c b a orde.r
The problem is in the notation. Single subscripts due to singular values are not adequate ( so the rotation is needed to preserve order of terminals in considering the physical setup of impedance elements connected in a triangular (delta or Pi) mode and the equivalent Y or T connection between the same terminals(consider 3 terminals connected in a Delta or triangle vs a connection iin a Y between the same terminals I have done some timing and space analysis which, while of no practical meaningfulness for this particular situation , does indicate tmy original explicit approach suffers greatly compared to a tacit version and the automatically generated tacit version is not as effective as "designed" versions such as yours. I will post these comparisons but right now, bedtime and an excess of wine loom

Don Kelly
On 26/10/2013 3:23 PM, Mike Day wrote:
Is this the sort of thing you wanted?
It's worth noting that _1 |. y and 2 0 1 { y yield the same result, so you don't need to use both forms in ytodel

deltoya =: (*_1&|.)%+/ NB. not tested for edge effects.....


ytodela=: ( +/@:* %] ) _1&|.


deltoya ytodela 1j2 2j1 3

1j2 2j1 3


ytodela deltoya 1j2 2j1 3

1j2 2j1 3


Mike


On 26/10/2013 04:36, Don Kelly wrote:
I have written a couple of explicit verbs for Y-delta network transforms and would like advice on how to express them in a tacit form. This is for my learning benefit as the use of these comes up only occasionally and input and output are always only 3 numbers.

deltoy=:3 : '(y*_1|.y)%+/y'  from Delta to Wye

ytodel =:3 : '(+/(y*_1|.y))% 2 0 1{y'  Wye to Delta

input and output are of the form zij =: a b c where a bc may be real or complex

my problem is getting around the multiple use of y I suspect that a train of forks might work but haven't got it yet.

In addition is there an easier way to obtain pairs a*b b*c and c*a than what I have used?


----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm


----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to