Using 'ANY'to select for ''any 2 of the following''

[ECL]

Hi All

Is there a way I can simplify my syntax so that it computes if '2 or more of the following'' conditions are met, instead of writing out every combination possible?  

If Q49=0&Q59=1&((Q54>1&Q53>1)OR(Q54>1&Q55>0)OR(Q54>1&Q56>0)OR(Q54>1&Q57>0)OR(Q54>1&Q52>1)OR(Q53>1&Q55>0)OR(Q53>1&Q56>0)OR(Q53>1&Q57>0)OR(Q53>1&Q52>1)OR(Q56>0&Q57>1)OR(Q56>0&Q52>1)OR(Q56>0&Q55>0)OR(Q57>0&Q52>1)OR(Q57>0&Q55>0))NOT(Q41>2&(Q43=0ORQ43=2)&Q45=1&((Q46>0&(Q47>0ORQ48>0))OR(Q46>0&(Q49>0ORQ50>0))OR((Q47>0ORQ48>0)& (Q49>0ORQ50>0)))) C3=1

THank you
Ecushla

[David Marso]

Does that code even run? No!
Are my eyes bleeding from looking at it? Yes!
Please describe WHAT you are trying to do here (preferably in English)?
Readability in code is something to strive for (Especially if you expect others to help you fix it)!

ECL wrote

Hi All

Is there a way I can simplify my syntax so that it computes if '2 or more of the following'' conditions are met, instead of writing out every combination possible?  

If Q49=0&Q59=1&((Q54>1&Q53>1)OR(Q54>1&Q55>0)OR(Q54>1&Q56>0)OR(Q54>1&Q57>0)OR(Q54>1&Q52>1)OR(Q53>1&Q55>0)OR(Q53>1&Q56>0)OR(Q53>1&Q57>0)OR(Q53>1&Q52>1)OR(Q56>0&Q57>1)OR(Q56>0&Q52>1)OR(Q56>0&Q55>0)OR(Q57>0&Q52>1)OR(Q57>0&Q55>0))NOT(Q41>2&(Q43=0ORQ43=2)&Q45=1&((Q46>0&(Q47>0ORQ48>0))OR(Q46>0&(Q49>0ORQ50>0))OR((Q47>0ORQ48>0)& (Q49>0ORQ50>0)))) C3=1

THank you
Ecushla

[ECL]

Apologies, ALL syntax looks unreadable to me and I was not aware that there is a particular way of doing it. Hope this reads better?

Basically, I want to know if there is an easier way of asking for 'any two of the following combinations' where you can choose from Q54>1, Q53>1,Q55>0, Q56>0, etc without listing all the possible combinations which I have done below. The code runs, but I figure there must be an easier way. I'm not wanting the ANY command, but rather ''ANY 2 or more" if there is such a thing.


IF Q49=0 & Q59=1
AND (
(Q54>1&Q53>1)
OR (Q54>1&Q55>0)
OR (Q54>1&Q56>0)
OR (Q54>1&Q57>0)
OR (Q54>1&Q52>1)
OR (Q53>1&Q55>0)
OR (Q53>1&Q56>0)
OR (Q53>1&Q57>0)
OR (Q53>1&Q52>1)
OR (Q56>0&Q57>1)
OR (Q56>0&Q52>1)
OR (Q56>0&Q55>0)
OR (Q57>0&Q52>1)
OR (Q57>0&Q55>0)
)
AND NOT(C1=1) C3=1.
Execute.

Thanks

[David Marso]

Without rewriting your code for you I will merely note/point out that.
A & B OR A & C OR A & D
may be refactored as
A & ( B OR C OR D )
ie
A & ANY(1,B,C,D)
also
A > 0 OR B > 0 can be sorted as
 SUM(A,B) > 0
OTOH:
Does simply
SUM(Q54 > 1, Q53 > 1,Q55 > 0, Q56 > 0, etc) GE 2
fit the bill?

Note that the inequality evaluates to either false,true or missing =0, 1 or MISSING
SUM(missing, x)=x
SUM(missing,missing)=missing

ECL wrote

Apologies, ALL syntax looks unreadable to me and I was not aware that there is a particular way of doing it. Hope this reads better?

Basically, I want to know if there is an easier way of asking for 'any two of the following combinations' where you can choose from Q54>1, Q53>1,Q55>0, Q56>0, etc without listing all the possible combinations which I have done below. The code runs, but I figure there must be an easier way. I'm not wanting the ANY command, but rather ''ANY 2 or more" if there is such a thing.


IF Q49=0 & Q59=1
AND (
(Q54>1&Q53>1)
OR (Q54>1&Q55>0)
OR (Q54>1&Q56>0)
OR (Q54>1&Q57>0)
OR (Q54>1&Q52>1)
OR (Q53>1&Q55>0)
OR (Q53>1&Q56>0)
OR (Q53>1&Q57>0)
OR (Q53>1&Q52>1)
OR (Q56>0&Q57>1)
OR (Q56>0&Q52>1)
OR (Q56>0&Q55>0)
OR (Q57>0&Q52>1)
OR (Q57>0&Q55>0)
)
AND NOT(C1=1) C3=1.
Execute.

Thanks

[Andy W]

One other useful way to refactor the code is sometimes to flip the conditionals; that is initialize the variable to 1 and then evaluate all of the arguments and change it to 0 if the sub-arguments are not met.

Note David's suggestion of the SUM's is presuming the variables can not take negative values (which I am unsure if that was stated somewhere in the prior threads).

For such a large table of assignments though having a physically separate look up table is sometimes in order. So then all you need is a MATCH FILES, editing future scenarios tends to be simpler, and just seeing how the code assigns categories is simpler then viewing syntax.

[Art Kendall]

It would help all readers of your syntax if you were to use more lines to present it. 
ANY would work something like this (untested) but would be a little superfluous in this instance.
[I did not try to help the visualization of part2.]
Compute part1 = If Q49 EQ 0 AND Q59 EQ 1 AND
 any(
(
(Q54 GT 1 AND Q53 GT 1) OR
(Q54 GT 1 AND Q55 GT 0) OR
(Q54 GT 1 AND Q56 GT 0) OR
(Q54 GT 1 AND Q57 GT 0) OR
(Q54 GT 1 AND Q52 GT 1) OR
(Q53 GT 1 AND Q55 GT 0) OR
(Q53 GT 1 AND Q56 GT 0) OR
(Q53 GT 1 AND Q57 GT 0) OR
(Q53 GT 1 AND Q52 GT 1) OR
(Q56 GT 0 AND Q57 GT 1) OR
(Q56 GT 0 AND Q52 GT 1) OR
(Q56 GT 0 AND Q55 GT 0) OR
(Q57 GT 0 AND Q52 GT 1) OR
(Q57 GT 0 AND Q55 GT 0)
),
1).
Compute part 2 =
NOT(Q41 GT 2 AND (Q43 EQ 0 OR Q43 EQ 2) AND Q45 EQ 1 AND ((Q46 GT 0 AND (Q47 GT 0 OR Q48 GT 0)) OR (Q46 GT 0 AND (Q49 GT 0 OR Q50 GT 0)) OR ((Q47 GT 0 OR Q48 GT 0) AND  (Q49 GT 0  OR  Q50 GT 0)))).

Conpute c3 = part1 and part2.


On 5/7/2014 9:27 PM, ECL [via SPSSX Discussion] wrote:

Hi All

Is there a way I can simplify my syntax so that it computes if '2 or more of the following'' conditions are met, instead of writing out every combination possible?  

If Q49=0&Q59=1&((Q54>1&Q53>1)OR(Q54>1&Q55>0)OR(Q54>1&Q56>0)OR(Q54>1&Q57>0)OR(Q54>1&Q52>1)OR(Q53>1&Q55>0)OR(Q53>1&Q56>0)OR(Q53>1&Q57>0)OR(Q53>1&Q52>1)OR(Q56>0&Q57>1)OR(Q56>0&Q52>1)OR(Q56>0&Q55>0)OR(Q57>0&Q52>1)OR(Q57>0&Q55>0))NOT(Q41>2&(Q43=0ORQ43=2)&Q45=1&((Q46>0&(Q47>0ORQ48>0))OR(Q46>0&(Q49>0ORQ50>0))OR((Q47>0ORQ48>0)& (Q49>0ORQ50>0)))) C3=1

THank you
Ecushla

---

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:

http://spssx-discussion.1045642.n5.nabble.com/Using-ANY-to-select-for-any-2-of-the-following-tp5725899.html

To start a new topic under SPSSX Discussion, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from SPSSX Discussion, click here.
NAML

[Richard Ristow]

At 09:27 PM 5/7/2014, ECL wrote:

>Is there a way I can simplify my syntax so that it computes if '2 or
>more of the following'' conditions are met, instead of writing out
>every combination possible?

I unrolled your statement. You seem to mean two or more of the
following conditions:
   Q52>1
   Q53>1
   Q54>1
   Q55>0
   Q56>0
   Q57>0

For this, try
   SUM(Q52>1,Q53>1,Q54>1,Q55>0,Q56>0,Q57>0) GE 2

Below is your statement as you had it, except for adding line breaks
and spaces. It has at least three syntax errors: on the third line,
and on the last line, you shouldn't have the "*" characters. And the
"NOT" needs to be preceded by a logical operator -- but I can't make
out what you might be trying to do from the word "NOT" on:

If   Q49=0
    & Q59=1
   *& (  (Q54>1&Q53>1)
       OR(Q54>1&Q55>0)
       OR(Q54>1&Q56>0)
       OR(Q54>1&Q57>0)
       OR(Q54>1&Q52>1)
       OR(Q53>1&Q55>0)
       OR(Q53>1&Q56>0)
       OR(Q53>1&Q57>0)
       OR(Q53>1&Q52>1)
       OR(Q56>0&Q57>1)
       OR(Q56>0&Q52>1)
       OR(Q56>0&Q55>0)
       OR(Q57>0&Q52>1)
       OR(Q57>0&Q55>0))
   NOT
      (  Q41>2
      & (Q43=0 OR Q43=2)
      &  Q45=1
      &   ((Q46>0&(Q47>0 OR Q48>0))
        OR(Q46>0&(Q49>0 OR Q50>0))
        OR((Q47>0 OR Q48>0)&(Q49>0 OR Q50>0))))
    *C3=1.

=====================
To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
[hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
command. To leave the list, send the command
SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
INFO REFCARD

[Art Kendall]

It would help all readers of your syntax if you were to use more lines to present it. 
vertical alignment is an old programmers trick to see parallel logic.
ANY would work something like this (untested) but would be a little superfluous in this instance.
[I did not try to help the visualization of part2.]
Compute part1 = If Q49 EQ 0 AND Q59 EQ 1 AND
 any(
(
(Q54 GT 1 AND Q53 GT 1) OR
(Q54 GT 1 AND Q55 GT 0) OR
(Q54 GT 1 AND Q56 GT 0) OR
(Q54 GT 1 AND Q57 GT 0) OR
(Q54 GT 1 AND Q52 GT 1) OR
(Q53 GT 1 AND Q55 GT 0) OR
(Q53 GT 1 AND Q56 GT 0) OR
(Q53 GT 1 AND Q57 GT 0) OR
(Q53 GT 1 AND Q52 GT 1) OR
(Q56 GT 0 AND Q57 GT 1) OR
(Q56 GT 0 AND Q52 GT 1) OR
(Q56 GT 0 AND Q55 GT 0) OR
(Q57 GT 0 AND Q52 GT 1) OR
(Q57 GT 0 AND Q55 GT 0)
),
1).
Compute part 2 =
NOT(Q41 GT 2 AND (Q43 EQ 0 OR Q43 EQ 2) AND Q45 EQ 1 AND ((Q46 GT 0 AND (Q47 GT 0 OR Q48 GT 0)) OR (Q46 GT 0 AND (Q49 GT 0 OR Q50 GT 0)) OR ((Q47 GT 0 OR Q48 GT 0) AND  (Q49 GT 0  OR  Q50 GT 0)))).

Conpute c3 = part1 and part2.
On 5/7/2014 9:27 PM, ECL [via SPSSX Discussion] wrote:

Hi All

Is there a way I can simplify my syntax so that it computes if '2 or more of the following'' conditions are met, instead of writing out every combination possible?  

If Q49=0&Q59=1&((Q54>1&Q53>1)OR(Q54>1&Q55>0)OR(Q54>1&Q56>0)OR(Q54>1&Q57>0)OR(Q54>1&Q52>1)OR(Q53>1&Q55>0)OR(Q53>1&Q56>0)OR(Q53>1&Q57>0)OR(Q53>1&Q52>1)OR(Q56>0&Q57>1)OR(Q56>0&Q52>1)OR(Q56>0&Q55>0)OR(Q57>0&Q52>1)OR(Q57>0&Q55>0))NOT(Q41>2&(Q43=0ORQ43=2)&Q45=1&((Q46>0&(Q47>0ORQ48>0))OR(Q46>0&(Q49>0ORQ50>0))OR((Q47>0ORQ48>0)& (Q49>0ORQ50>0)))) C3=1

THank you
Ecushla

---

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:

http://spssx-discussion.1045642.n5.nabble.com/Using-ANY-to-select-for-any-2-of-the-following-tp5725899.html

To start a new topic under SPSSX Discussion, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from SPSSX Discussion, click here.
NAML

[Art Kendall]

Four things that would help make you syntax more readable.
(1) use vertical alignment for parallel segment of statements as you did in this post.
(2) use indentation
(3) break complex logic into parts
compute part1 = list of conditions.
compute part2 = another list of conditions
compute flag = part1 and part2
(4) use the conventional operators (gt lt, ge, etc) rather than the symbolic operators (>, >, >=, etc). especially reserve the assignment operator (=) for assignment and not for logical AND.

On 5/8/2014 1:11 AM, ECL [via SPSSX Discussion] wrote:

Apologies, ALL syntax looks unreadable to me and I was not aware that there is a particular way of doing it. Hope this reads better?

Basically, I want to know if there is an easier way of asking for 'any two of the following combinations' where you can choose from Q54>1, Q53>1,Q55>0, Q56>0, etc without listing all the possible combinations which I have done below. The code runs, but I figure there must be an easier way. I'm not wanting the ANY command, but rather ''ANY 2 or more" if there is such a thing.


IF Q49=0 & Q59=1
AND (
(Q54>1&Q53>1)
OR (Q54>1&Q55>0)
OR (Q54>1&Q56>0)
OR (Q54>1&Q57>0)
OR (Q54>1&Q52>1)
OR (Q53>1&Q55>0)
OR (Q53>1&Q56>0)
OR (Q53>1&Q57>0)
OR (Q53>1&Q52>1)
OR (Q56>0&Q57>1)
OR (Q56>0&Q52>1)
OR (Q56>0&Q55>0)
OR (Q57>0&Q52>1)
OR (Q57>0&Q55>0)
)
AND NOT(C1=1) C3=1.
Execute.

Thanks

---

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:

http://spssx-discussion.1045642.n5.nabble.com/Using-ANY-to-select-for-any-2-of-the-following-tp5725899p5725907.html

To start a new topic under SPSSX Discussion, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from SPSSX Discussion, click here.
NAML