Terse Method to Swap Lowest for Highest? Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?Efficient method for Inserting arrays into arraysSwap elements in list without copyBetter method to swap the values of two 2-D arraysHow to get this list with a terse methodBuilt-in (or Terse) Method to Combine and Transpose DatasetsAre there more readable and terse method can get this listefficiently method for generating a sequenceSimple method to sort versionsFunction for SortBySwap Elements of a continuous List, possible?
Should I call the interviewer directly, if HR aren't responding?
Gastric acid as a weapon
How can players work together to take actions that are otherwise impossible?
Right-skewed distribution with mean equals to mode?
G-Code for resetting to 100% speed
Is there a Spanish version of "dot your i's and cross your t's" that includes the letter 'ñ'?
What would be the ideal power source for a cybernetic eye?
Using et al. for a last / senior author rather than for a first author
Did Xerox really develop the first LAN?
What LEGO pieces have "real-world" functionality?
When to stop saving and start investing?
Models of set theory where not every set can be linearly ordered
Should gear shift center itself while in neutral?
When is phishing education going too far?
If a contract sometimes uses the wrong name, is it still valid?
What is the correct way to use the pinch test for dehydration?
The logistics of corpse disposal
How much radiation do nuclear physics experiments expose researchers to nowadays?
Why aren't air breathing engines used as small first stages
Are my PIs rude or am I just being too sensitive?
Java 8 stream max() function argument type Comparator vs Comparable
How does a Death Domain cleric's Touch of Death feature work with Touch-range spells delivered by familiars?
How discoverable are IPv6 addresses and AAAA names by potential attackers?
What happens to sewage if there is no river near by?
Terse Method to Swap Lowest for Highest?
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?Efficient method for Inserting arrays into arraysSwap elements in list without copyBetter method to swap the values of two 2-D arraysHow to get this list with a terse methodBuilt-in (or Terse) Method to Combine and Transpose DatasetsAre there more readable and terse method can get this listefficiently method for generating a sequenceSimple method to sort versionsFunction for SortBySwap Elements of a continuous List, possible?
$begingroup$
I have built a solution to swap the lowest values with the highest values in a list.
With
SeedRandom[987]
test = RandomSample@*Join @@ Range @@@ 6, 10, 56, 60, 1, 5, -5, -1
-1, 2, 7, 8, 60, 57, 58, 10, 9, 4, -5, -3, 3, 59, 1, 5, -4, 6, -2, 56
Then
swapPositions =
PermutationReplace[
Ordering@Ordering@test,
With[len = Length@test,
Cycles@
Transpose@Range @@ 1, Floor[len/2], Reverse@*Range @@ Ceiling[len/2] + 1, len
]
];
Sort[test][[swapPositions]]
56, 9, 4, 3, -5, -2, -3, 1, 2, 7, 60, 58, 8, -4, 10, 6, 59, 5, 57, -1
The largest half of the numbers have had their positions swapped with lowest half of the numbers.
However, it feels too verbose and I think Sort
might be expensive in this case. Is there a built-in function or more terse method to achieve this. Of course with no loss in speed. The actual case is for list of length 100000 and more.
list-manipulation performance-tuning sorting permutation
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have built a solution to swap the lowest values with the highest values in a list.
With
SeedRandom[987]
test = RandomSample@*Join @@ Range @@@ 6, 10, 56, 60, 1, 5, -5, -1
-1, 2, 7, 8, 60, 57, 58, 10, 9, 4, -5, -3, 3, 59, 1, 5, -4, 6, -2, 56
Then
swapPositions =
PermutationReplace[
Ordering@Ordering@test,
With[len = Length@test,
Cycles@
Transpose@Range @@ 1, Floor[len/2], Reverse@*Range @@ Ceiling[len/2] + 1, len
]
];
Sort[test][[swapPositions]]
56, 9, 4, 3, -5, -2, -3, 1, 2, 7, 60, 58, 8, -4, 10, 6, 59, 5, 57, -1
The largest half of the numbers have had their positions swapped with lowest half of the numbers.
However, it feels too verbose and I think Sort
might be expensive in this case. Is there a built-in function or more terse method to achieve this. Of course with no loss in speed. The actual case is for list of length 100000 and more.
list-manipulation performance-tuning sorting permutation
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have built a solution to swap the lowest values with the highest values in a list.
With
SeedRandom[987]
test = RandomSample@*Join @@ Range @@@ 6, 10, 56, 60, 1, 5, -5, -1
-1, 2, 7, 8, 60, 57, 58, 10, 9, 4, -5, -3, 3, 59, 1, 5, -4, 6, -2, 56
Then
swapPositions =
PermutationReplace[
Ordering@Ordering@test,
With[len = Length@test,
Cycles@
Transpose@Range @@ 1, Floor[len/2], Reverse@*Range @@ Ceiling[len/2] + 1, len
]
];
Sort[test][[swapPositions]]
56, 9, 4, 3, -5, -2, -3, 1, 2, 7, 60, 58, 8, -4, 10, 6, 59, 5, 57, -1
The largest half of the numbers have had their positions swapped with lowest half of the numbers.
However, it feels too verbose and I think Sort
might be expensive in this case. Is there a built-in function or more terse method to achieve this. Of course with no loss in speed. The actual case is for list of length 100000 and more.
list-manipulation performance-tuning sorting permutation
$endgroup$
I have built a solution to swap the lowest values with the highest values in a list.
With
SeedRandom[987]
test = RandomSample@*Join @@ Range @@@ 6, 10, 56, 60, 1, 5, -5, -1
-1, 2, 7, 8, 60, 57, 58, 10, 9, 4, -5, -3, 3, 59, 1, 5, -4, 6, -2, 56
Then
swapPositions =
PermutationReplace[
Ordering@Ordering@test,
With[len = Length@test,
Cycles@
Transpose@Range @@ 1, Floor[len/2], Reverse@*Range @@ Ceiling[len/2] + 1, len
]
];
Sort[test][[swapPositions]]
56, 9, 4, 3, -5, -2, -3, 1, 2, 7, 60, 58, 8, -4, 10, 6, 59, 5, 57, -1
The largest half of the numbers have had their positions swapped with lowest half of the numbers.
However, it feels too verbose and I think Sort
might be expensive in this case. Is there a built-in function or more terse method to achieve this. Of course with no loss in speed. The actual case is for list of length 100000 and more.
list-manipulation performance-tuning sorting permutation
list-manipulation performance-tuning sorting permutation
edited Mar 23 at 2:15
J. M. is away♦
98.9k10311467
98.9k10311467
asked Mar 22 at 20:57
EdmundEdmund
26.7k330103
26.7k330103
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
How about:
Module[tmp = test,
With[ord=Ordering[tmp],
tmp[[ord]] = Reverse @ tmp[[ord]]];
tmp
]
56, 9, 4, 3, -5, -2, -3, 1, 2, 7, 60, 58, 8, -4, 10, 6, 59, 5, 57, -1
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
That is so obvious I want to cry. Thanks (+1).
$endgroup$
– Edmund
Mar 22 at 21:15
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is equivalent to Carl's procedure, except that it uses one less scratch list:
With[ord = Ordering[test],
test[[PermutationProduct[Reverse[ord], InversePermutation[ord]]]]]
56, 9, 4, 3, -5, -2, -3, 1, 2, 7, 60, 58, 8, -4, 10, 6, 59, 5, 57, -1
Recall that list[[perm]] = list
is equivalent to list = list[[InversePermutation[perm]]]
, where perm
is a permutation list. (The situation is equivalent to list.pmat
being the same as Transpose[pmat].list
if pmat
is a permutation matrix.) You can then use PermutationProduct[]
to compose successive permutations.
(This was supposed to be a comment, but it got too long.)
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
This solution doesn't copy the list so may be faster than Carl's. (+1).
$endgroup$
– Edmund
Mar 23 at 3:38
$begingroup$
FWIW, I consistently get 56, -2, 6, -4, 5, 1, 59, 3, -3, -5, 4, 9, 10, 58, 57, 60, 8, 7, 2, -1 from this.
$endgroup$
– Christopher Lamb
Mar 23 at 16:01
$begingroup$
@Rabbit, what version number of Mathematica is giving that result?
$endgroup$
– J. M. is away♦
Mar 23 at 16:10
$begingroup$
11.3.0.0 (5944644, 2018030701) Win 10. I did a trace, which might have had the needed info but I didn't catch it. Started w/ fresh kernel, & repeated, w/ same result. Baffled.
$endgroup$
– Christopher Lamb
Mar 23 at 16:16
1
$begingroup$
At least on my machine, the questioner's original (very verbose) proposed solution is faster than any other proposal. In order of presentation: 0.0000114366 v. 0.0000357762 v. 0.0000164219 (AbsoluteTiming in seconds).
$endgroup$
– CElliott
Apr 3 at 14:10
|
show 3 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "387"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathematica.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f193790%2fterse-method-to-swap-lowest-for-highest%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
How about:
Module[tmp = test,
With[ord=Ordering[tmp],
tmp[[ord]] = Reverse @ tmp[[ord]]];
tmp
]
56, 9, 4, 3, -5, -2, -3, 1, 2, 7, 60, 58, 8, -4, 10, 6, 59, 5, 57, -1
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
That is so obvious I want to cry. Thanks (+1).
$endgroup$
– Edmund
Mar 22 at 21:15
add a comment |
$begingroup$
How about:
Module[tmp = test,
With[ord=Ordering[tmp],
tmp[[ord]] = Reverse @ tmp[[ord]]];
tmp
]
56, 9, 4, 3, -5, -2, -3, 1, 2, 7, 60, 58, 8, -4, 10, 6, 59, 5, 57, -1
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
That is so obvious I want to cry. Thanks (+1).
$endgroup$
– Edmund
Mar 22 at 21:15
add a comment |
$begingroup$
How about:
Module[tmp = test,
With[ord=Ordering[tmp],
tmp[[ord]] = Reverse @ tmp[[ord]]];
tmp
]
56, 9, 4, 3, -5, -2, -3, 1, 2, 7, 60, 58, 8, -4, 10, 6, 59, 5, 57, -1
$endgroup$
How about:
Module[tmp = test,
With[ord=Ordering[tmp],
tmp[[ord]] = Reverse @ tmp[[ord]]];
tmp
]
56, 9, 4, 3, -5, -2, -3, 1, 2, 7, 60, 58, 8, -4, 10, 6, 59, 5, 57, -1
answered Mar 22 at 21:11
Carl WollCarl Woll
74.2k398193
74.2k398193
1
$begingroup$
That is so obvious I want to cry. Thanks (+1).
$endgroup$
– Edmund
Mar 22 at 21:15
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
That is so obvious I want to cry. Thanks (+1).
$endgroup$
– Edmund
Mar 22 at 21:15
1
1
$begingroup$
That is so obvious I want to cry. Thanks (+1).
$endgroup$
– Edmund
Mar 22 at 21:15
$begingroup$
That is so obvious I want to cry. Thanks (+1).
$endgroup$
– Edmund
Mar 22 at 21:15
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is equivalent to Carl's procedure, except that it uses one less scratch list:
With[ord = Ordering[test],
test[[PermutationProduct[Reverse[ord], InversePermutation[ord]]]]]
56, 9, 4, 3, -5, -2, -3, 1, 2, 7, 60, 58, 8, -4, 10, 6, 59, 5, 57, -1
Recall that list[[perm]] = list
is equivalent to list = list[[InversePermutation[perm]]]
, where perm
is a permutation list. (The situation is equivalent to list.pmat
being the same as Transpose[pmat].list
if pmat
is a permutation matrix.) You can then use PermutationProduct[]
to compose successive permutations.
(This was supposed to be a comment, but it got too long.)
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
This solution doesn't copy the list so may be faster than Carl's. (+1).
$endgroup$
– Edmund
Mar 23 at 3:38
$begingroup$
FWIW, I consistently get 56, -2, 6, -4, 5, 1, 59, 3, -3, -5, 4, 9, 10, 58, 57, 60, 8, 7, 2, -1 from this.
$endgroup$
– Christopher Lamb
Mar 23 at 16:01
$begingroup$
@Rabbit, what version number of Mathematica is giving that result?
$endgroup$
– J. M. is away♦
Mar 23 at 16:10
$begingroup$
11.3.0.0 (5944644, 2018030701) Win 10. I did a trace, which might have had the needed info but I didn't catch it. Started w/ fresh kernel, & repeated, w/ same result. Baffled.
$endgroup$
– Christopher Lamb
Mar 23 at 16:16
1
$begingroup$
At least on my machine, the questioner's original (very verbose) proposed solution is faster than any other proposal. In order of presentation: 0.0000114366 v. 0.0000357762 v. 0.0000164219 (AbsoluteTiming in seconds).
$endgroup$
– CElliott
Apr 3 at 14:10
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
This is equivalent to Carl's procedure, except that it uses one less scratch list:
With[ord = Ordering[test],
test[[PermutationProduct[Reverse[ord], InversePermutation[ord]]]]]
56, 9, 4, 3, -5, -2, -3, 1, 2, 7, 60, 58, 8, -4, 10, 6, 59, 5, 57, -1
Recall that list[[perm]] = list
is equivalent to list = list[[InversePermutation[perm]]]
, where perm
is a permutation list. (The situation is equivalent to list.pmat
being the same as Transpose[pmat].list
if pmat
is a permutation matrix.) You can then use PermutationProduct[]
to compose successive permutations.
(This was supposed to be a comment, but it got too long.)
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
This solution doesn't copy the list so may be faster than Carl's. (+1).
$endgroup$
– Edmund
Mar 23 at 3:38
$begingroup$
FWIW, I consistently get 56, -2, 6, -4, 5, 1, 59, 3, -3, -5, 4, 9, 10, 58, 57, 60, 8, 7, 2, -1 from this.
$endgroup$
– Christopher Lamb
Mar 23 at 16:01
$begingroup$
@Rabbit, what version number of Mathematica is giving that result?
$endgroup$
– J. M. is away♦
Mar 23 at 16:10
$begingroup$
11.3.0.0 (5944644, 2018030701) Win 10. I did a trace, which might have had the needed info but I didn't catch it. Started w/ fresh kernel, & repeated, w/ same result. Baffled.
$endgroup$
– Christopher Lamb
Mar 23 at 16:16
1
$begingroup$
At least on my machine, the questioner's original (very verbose) proposed solution is faster than any other proposal. In order of presentation: 0.0000114366 v. 0.0000357762 v. 0.0000164219 (AbsoluteTiming in seconds).
$endgroup$
– CElliott
Apr 3 at 14:10
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
This is equivalent to Carl's procedure, except that it uses one less scratch list:
With[ord = Ordering[test],
test[[PermutationProduct[Reverse[ord], InversePermutation[ord]]]]]
56, 9, 4, 3, -5, -2, -3, 1, 2, 7, 60, 58, 8, -4, 10, 6, 59, 5, 57, -1
Recall that list[[perm]] = list
is equivalent to list = list[[InversePermutation[perm]]]
, where perm
is a permutation list. (The situation is equivalent to list.pmat
being the same as Transpose[pmat].list
if pmat
is a permutation matrix.) You can then use PermutationProduct[]
to compose successive permutations.
(This was supposed to be a comment, but it got too long.)
$endgroup$
This is equivalent to Carl's procedure, except that it uses one less scratch list:
With[ord = Ordering[test],
test[[PermutationProduct[Reverse[ord], InversePermutation[ord]]]]]
56, 9, 4, 3, -5, -2, -3, 1, 2, 7, 60, 58, 8, -4, 10, 6, 59, 5, 57, -1
Recall that list[[perm]] = list
is equivalent to list = list[[InversePermutation[perm]]]
, where perm
is a permutation list. (The situation is equivalent to list.pmat
being the same as Transpose[pmat].list
if pmat
is a permutation matrix.) You can then use PermutationProduct[]
to compose successive permutations.
(This was supposed to be a comment, but it got too long.)
edited Mar 23 at 2:27
answered Mar 23 at 2:14
J. M. is away♦J. M. is away
98.9k10311467
98.9k10311467
$begingroup$
This solution doesn't copy the list so may be faster than Carl's. (+1).
$endgroup$
– Edmund
Mar 23 at 3:38
$begingroup$
FWIW, I consistently get 56, -2, 6, -4, 5, 1, 59, 3, -3, -5, 4, 9, 10, 58, 57, 60, 8, 7, 2, -1 from this.
$endgroup$
– Christopher Lamb
Mar 23 at 16:01
$begingroup$
@Rabbit, what version number of Mathematica is giving that result?
$endgroup$
– J. M. is away♦
Mar 23 at 16:10
$begingroup$
11.3.0.0 (5944644, 2018030701) Win 10. I did a trace, which might have had the needed info but I didn't catch it. Started w/ fresh kernel, & repeated, w/ same result. Baffled.
$endgroup$
– Christopher Lamb
Mar 23 at 16:16
1
$begingroup$
At least on my machine, the questioner's original (very verbose) proposed solution is faster than any other proposal. In order of presentation: 0.0000114366 v. 0.0000357762 v. 0.0000164219 (AbsoluteTiming in seconds).
$endgroup$
– CElliott
Apr 3 at 14:10
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
This solution doesn't copy the list so may be faster than Carl's. (+1).
$endgroup$
– Edmund
Mar 23 at 3:38
$begingroup$
FWIW, I consistently get 56, -2, 6, -4, 5, 1, 59, 3, -3, -5, 4, 9, 10, 58, 57, 60, 8, 7, 2, -1 from this.
$endgroup$
– Christopher Lamb
Mar 23 at 16:01
$begingroup$
@Rabbit, what version number of Mathematica is giving that result?
$endgroup$
– J. M. is away♦
Mar 23 at 16:10
$begingroup$
11.3.0.0 (5944644, 2018030701) Win 10. I did a trace, which might have had the needed info but I didn't catch it. Started w/ fresh kernel, & repeated, w/ same result. Baffled.
$endgroup$
– Christopher Lamb
Mar 23 at 16:16
1
$begingroup$
At least on my machine, the questioner's original (very verbose) proposed solution is faster than any other proposal. In order of presentation: 0.0000114366 v. 0.0000357762 v. 0.0000164219 (AbsoluteTiming in seconds).
$endgroup$
– CElliott
Apr 3 at 14:10
$begingroup$
This solution doesn't copy the list so may be faster than Carl's. (+1).
$endgroup$
– Edmund
Mar 23 at 3:38
$begingroup$
This solution doesn't copy the list so may be faster than Carl's. (+1).
$endgroup$
– Edmund
Mar 23 at 3:38
$begingroup$
FWIW, I consistently get 56, -2, 6, -4, 5, 1, 59, 3, -3, -5, 4, 9, 10, 58, 57, 60, 8, 7, 2, -1 from this.
$endgroup$
– Christopher Lamb
Mar 23 at 16:01
$begingroup$
FWIW, I consistently get 56, -2, 6, -4, 5, 1, 59, 3, -3, -5, 4, 9, 10, 58, 57, 60, 8, 7, 2, -1 from this.
$endgroup$
– Christopher Lamb
Mar 23 at 16:01
$begingroup$
@Rabbit, what version number of Mathematica is giving that result?
$endgroup$
– J. M. is away♦
Mar 23 at 16:10
$begingroup$
@Rabbit, what version number of Mathematica is giving that result?
$endgroup$
– J. M. is away♦
Mar 23 at 16:10
$begingroup$
11.3.0.0 (5944644, 2018030701) Win 10. I did a trace, which might have had the needed info but I didn't catch it. Started w/ fresh kernel, & repeated, w/ same result. Baffled.
$endgroup$
– Christopher Lamb
Mar 23 at 16:16
$begingroup$
11.3.0.0 (5944644, 2018030701) Win 10. I did a trace, which might have had the needed info but I didn't catch it. Started w/ fresh kernel, & repeated, w/ same result. Baffled.
$endgroup$
– Christopher Lamb
Mar 23 at 16:16
1
1
$begingroup$
At least on my machine, the questioner's original (very verbose) proposed solution is faster than any other proposal. In order of presentation: 0.0000114366 v. 0.0000357762 v. 0.0000164219 (AbsoluteTiming in seconds).
$endgroup$
– CElliott
Apr 3 at 14:10
$begingroup$
At least on my machine, the questioner's original (very verbose) proposed solution is faster than any other proposal. In order of presentation: 0.0000114366 v. 0.0000357762 v. 0.0000164219 (AbsoluteTiming in seconds).
$endgroup$
– CElliott
Apr 3 at 14:10
|
show 3 more comments
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematica Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathematica.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f193790%2fterse-method-to-swap-lowest-for-highest%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown