"Macro(Macro)?"

Schalkekid

Hi everybody,
I am wondering, if it is possible to change parameter values of an operator which is processed in a loop according to the current iteration number.
I want to change the "convergence epsilon" parameter of the SVM-Operator during a binary2multiclass chain, to have different values at different iterations.
I had the idea to define macros outside the chain for every iteration: epsilon0, epsilon1, epsilon2, ...
And now I tried to access the macros inside the chain via %{epsilon%{a}}. Unfortunately, this is does not work.
Do you have any ideas how I could manage this.
Perhaps there is another way to create a process which works in the way I described here?!

Best,
Felix

haddock

Greets Felix!

In the past I have concatenated macros within loops, so if %{H}=="hope"  and %{T}=="that" and %{h} =="helps" I could make this message...

%{H}" "%{T}" "%{h}

Which I do  ;D

Schalkekid

Thanks haddock,
that's a nice example. But I have the problem, that I want to dynamically access a macro called 'hope that helps' by the other three macros?
That's the problem I have.
For your example, I would use %{%{H}" "%{T}" "%{h}}, and this does not work.

Best,
Felix

haddock

Hola!

Putting a macro inside a macro is where the problem lies, because a macro is just shorthand for the string it represents. Make a macro at each level of your nested loops, and then join them together.. so "epsilon%{xx}%{yy}" rather than "epsilon%{xx%{yy}}".

%{H}" "%{T}" "%{h}!

Schalkekid

Hello and thanks again,

I think that won't help me.
I have a problem to access a macro dynamically.

The macros are containing double values, and they are called:

epsilon0
epsilon1

Can I access the values of the macros in a (for this case) twofold crossvalidation for instance?

If nested macros would be possible, I would do something like setting a new macro inside the crossvalidation:

valueMacro = %{epsilon%{a}}

and use %{valueMacro} as a parameter inside the crossValidation.

How can I do so by not using nested macros?

Best,
Felix

haddock

Hi there,

You can access macros, and generate new ones from them like this..

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
<process version="5.0">
  <context>
    <input/>
    <output/>
    <macros/>
  </context>
  <operator activated="true" class="process" compatibility="5.0.11" expanded="true" name="Process">
    <process expanded="true" height="190" width="346">
      <operator activated="true" class="loop" compatibility="5.0.11" expanded="true" height="60" name="Loop" width="90" x="246" y="75">
        <parameter key="iterations" value="10"/>
        <process expanded="true" height="298" width="811">
          <operator activated="true" class="set_macro" compatibility="5.0.11" expanded="true" height="76" name="Set Macro" width="90" x="71" y="45">
            <parameter key="macro" value="epsilon1"/>
            <parameter key="value" value="%{a}"/>
          </operator>
          <operator activated="true" class="loop" compatibility="5.0.11" expanded="true" height="76" name="Loop (2)" width="90" x="313" y="75">
            <process expanded="true" height="298" width="811">
              <operator activated="true" class="set_macro" compatibility="5.0.11" expanded="true" height="76" name="Set Macro (2)" width="90" x="45" y="75">
                <parameter key="macro" value="epsilon2"/>
                <parameter key="value" value="%{epsilon1}"/>
              </operator>
              <operator activated="true" class="generate_macro" compatibility="5.0.11" expanded="true" height="76" name="Generate Macro" width="90" x="179" y="75">
                <list key="function_descriptions">
                  <parameter key="epsilon3" value="%{epsilon1}*%{epsilon2}+%{b}"/>
                </list>
              </operator>
              <operator activated="true" class="provide_macro_as_log_value" compatibility="5.0.11" expanded="true" height="76" name="Provide Macro as Log Value" width="90" x="313" y="75">
                <parameter key="macro_name" value="epsilon3"/>
              </operator>
              <operator activated="true" class="log" compatibility="5.0.11" expanded="true" height="76" name="Log" width="90" x="447" y="75">
                <list key="log">
                  <parameter key="like this" value="operator.Provide Macro as Log Value.value.macro_value"/>
                </list>
              </operator>
              <connect from_op="Set Macro (2)" from_port="through 1" to_op="Generate Macro" to_port="through 1"/>
              <connect from_op="Generate Macro" from_port="through 1" to_op="Provide Macro as Log Value" to_port="through 1"/>
              <connect from_op="Provide Macro as Log Value" from_port="through 1" to_op="Log" to_port="through 1"/>
              <portSpacing port="source_input 1" spacing="0"/>
              <portSpacing port="source_input 2" spacing="0"/>
              <portSpacing port="sink_output 1" spacing="0"/>
            </process>
          </operator>
          <connect from_op="Set Macro" from_port="through 1" to_op="Loop (2)" to_port="input 1"/>
          <portSpacing port="source_input 1" spacing="0"/>
          <portSpacing port="sink_output 1" spacing="0"/>
        </process>
      </operator>
      <portSpacing port="source_input 1" spacing="0"/>
      <portSpacing port="sink_result 1" spacing="0"/>
    </process>
  </operator>
</process>

Schalkekid

Hey, thank you,
that's very interesting but still won't help me with my current problem.
I don't want to multiply or add the 'iteration number' to some other macro.
I want to use the 'iteration number' to select (switch/case or if/else) a special macro value out of a number of predefined macros. In my experiment there is one macro for every iteration number - which are defined outside the macro.

Best,
Felix

land

Hi Felix,
you can use the approach haddock outlined and incorporate nested if conditions to select the macro. I don't think there's another solution unless you use a second data table storing the different values. You could then extract the macro from the second data table (possible loaded by a recall operator) on a row defined by another macro.

Greetings,
  Sebastian

Schalkekid

Okay, I'll have a try.

Best,
Felix