Re: is it a bug in sum?
2008-04-01 07:03:36 GMT
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 10:01 PM, laurent couraud <l.couraud <at> free.fr> wrote:
> simpsum:true$
> sum((x[i]-sum(x[i],i,1,n)/n)^2,i,1,n)
>
> The result is 0.
I don't have Maxima where I am (travelling), but I imagine that using
the same index names for the inner and outer sums will cause problems
(and is not standard mathematical usage either).
Try using j as the inner index, for example.
-s
Re: is it a bug in sum?
2008-04-01 10:40:11 GMT
Stavros is correct; with distinct sum indices, it works: (%i6) sum((x[j]-sum(x[i],i,1,n)/n)^2,j,1,n); (%o6) sum((x[j]-sum(x[i],i,1,n)/n)^2,j,1,n) (%i7) ev(%,n=2,'sum); (%o7) (x[2]-(x[2]+x[1])/2)^2+(x[1]-(x[2]+x[1])/2)^2 Barton -----maxima-bounces <at> math.utexas.edu wrote: ----- >Try using j as the inner index, for example. > > -s
FW: benchmarking CAS
2008-04-01 13:21:51 GMT
> -----Original Message----- > From: Roman Pearce [mailto:rpearcea <at> gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 8:43 PM > To: rjf > Subject: Re: benchmarking CAS > > > Are you saying that if the polynomials were small, Maple > would not use > > the same routines and would not run with garbage collection? > > That's correct. For small polynomials Maple expands and divides > products in the kernel, using compiled C code that runs without > garbage collection. For large problems the kernel calls back into the > Maple library, to the routines `expand/bigprod` and `expand/bigdiv` > and `expand/bigpow`. These routines are recursive, interpreted Maple > code that run with garbage collection. That's why in your paper on > sparse multiplication Maple 7 was found to be much slower than > MapleVR4, etc. They had to change it because for their algorithms, > doing a big problem without garbage collection will crash the system. > > On 3/30/08, rjf <fateman <at> gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mar 29, 6:28 pm, Roman Pearce <rpear... <at> gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Because the polynomials are large, Maple uses interpreted routines > > > that run with garbage collection. > > > > Are you saying that if the polynomials were small, Maple > would not use(Continue reading)
Re: is it a bug in sum?
2008-04-01 15:13:32 GMT
On 4/1/08, Stavros Macrakis <macrakis <at> alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> I don't have Maxima where I am (travelling), but I imagine that using
> the same index names for the inner and outer sums will cause problems
> (and is not standard mathematical usage either).
Well, as it stands, the sum-simplfication code attempts to treat
the summation index as a local variable, although it messes up
this problem.
(%i1) trace (?simpsum2, ?simpsum1, ?simpsum1\-save);
(%o1) [simpsum2, simpsum1, simpsum1-save]
(%i2) display2d : false;
(%o2) false
(%i3) sum ((x[j] - sum (x[j], j, 1, n)/n)^2, j, 1, n);
1 Enter ?simpsum1 [x[?g15869],?g15869,1,n]
1 Exit ?simpsum1 'sum(x[?g15869],?g15869,1,n)
1 Enter ?simpsum1 [x[?g15869],?g15869,1,n]
1 Exit ?simpsum1 'sum(x[?g15869],?g15869,1,n)
1 Enter ?simpsum1 [x[j],j,1,n]
1 Exit ?simpsum1 'sum(x[j],j,1,n)
1 Enter ?simpsum1 [(x[j]-('sum(x[j],j,1,n))/n)^2,j,1,n]
1 Exit ?simpsum1 'sum((x[j]-('sum(x[j],j,1,n))/n)^2,j,1,n)
(%o3) 'sum((x[j]-('sum(x[j],j,1,n))/n)^2,j,1,n)
(%i4) %, simpsum;
1 Enter ?simpsum1 [x[?g15929],?g15929,1,n]
1 Enter ?simpsum1\-save [x[?g15929],?g15929,1,n]
1 Enter ?simpsum2 [x[?g15929],?g15929,1,n]
2 Enter ?simpsum1 [x[?g15929],?g15929,1,n]
2 Exit ?simpsum1 'sum(x[?g15929],?g15929,1,n)
(Continue reading)Re: vector geometrie
2008-04-01 15:14:02 GMT
On Monday 31 March 2008 17:25, Hans W. Hofmann wrote: > I am searching for some macros to handle vector geometrie inclusive > plotting. Is there a pending project or exist here some people zu start a > project? As rookie in programming macros I want to discuss the basics and > structur of a vector geometrie macros preferably in german-english. > > Some thoughts: > Points should described as a list [y,x,z] and vectors as matrix > matrix([x],[y],[z]). > I tend to have e.g. a line object, pardon, will say a line list, which > covers all/some details of describing/plotting a line. Input wellcome... As far as I know, there are no special packages for analytic geometry, but basic functions and linear algebra stuff are enough, I think. Introducing new objects may produce more mess than advantages. In vector calculus code, Maxima represents vectors as lists; "listarith" works with lists in appropriate way. Vector plotting is already implemented in draw2d / draw3d. -- -- Alexey Beshenov <al <at> beshenov.ru> http://beshenov.ru/
_______________________________________________ Maxima mailing list Maxima <at> math.utexas.edu http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima(Continue reading)
besselarray?
2008-04-01 16:55:02 GMT
Maxima has the variable besselarray. It's no longer documented, but I think it used to contain the values of the bessel functions since the computation of a bessel function oftentimes computes the value of the bessel function for all lower orders. Bug 1920177 <https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1920177&group_id=4933> has several fixes, and the besselarray, besides being currently broken, also complicates the implementation a bit. I guess it's important if you're using Fourier-Bessel expansions or something like that, but perhaps we should provide a different interface if you want the sequence of values. Should we keep besselarray around? Ray
Re: cardioid
2008-04-01 17:09:55 GMT
Hi Thx for all answers. 1. I think that in polar form cardioid: e1:exp(t*%i)/2-exp(2*t*%i)/4; can't be drawn since polar plots have "center " in point 0 ( This cardioid really has radius equation: r: (1-cos(theta))/2; but it has to be moved to the right 1/4 unit. It can't be done in polar form 2. You say: "You're converting expression to polar form incorrectly." Can you show me how to do it correctly ? Regards Adam
Re: A partfrac limitation
2008-04-01 18:15:57 GMT
Dear All, I have the same problem with partfrac like Albert Reiner had:
kovzol <at> pascal:~$ maxima
Maxima 5.13.0 http://maxima.sourceforge.net
Using Lisp CLISP 2.38 (2006-01-24)
Distributed under the GNU Public License. See the file COPYING.
Dedicated to the memory of William Schelter.
This is a development version of Maxima. The function bug_report()
provides bug reporting information.
(%i1) load(simplify_sum)$
(%i2) my_partfrac(e, x) := partfrac(num(e)/factor_with_solve(e, x), x)$
(%i3) my_partfrac(1/(x^4+20*x^2+120), x);
Division by 0
#0: my_partfrac(e=1/(x^4+20*x^2+120),x=x)(simplify_sum.mac line 511)
-- an error. To debug this try debugmode(true);
Am I using a too old version of Maxima?
Best regards, Zoltan
_______________________________________________ Maxima mailing list Maxima <at> math.utexas.edu http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima
Re: A partfrac limitation
2008-04-01 18:58:32 GMT
Hi Zoltan, I think that there should be denom(e)
my_partfrac(e, x) := partfrac(num(e)/factor_with_solve(denom(e), x), x)$
Another problem is that factor_with_solve factors over complex numbers. I used the following:
(factor_with_solve_real is very close to factor_with_solve but gives factorization over reals)
factor_with_solve_real(expr, n) := block(
[sol, fac, expr1],
sol : solve(expr, n),
expr : ratexpand(expr),
fac : ratcoef(expr, n, hipow(expr, n)),
for i:1 thru length(sol) do (
if not(freeof(n, rhs(sol[i]))) then error(),
if imagpart(rectform(rhs(sol[i])))=0 then
fac : fac * (n - rhs(sol[i]))^multiplicities[i]
else
(if imagpart(rectform(rhs(sol[i])))>0 then
fac: fac*(ratsimp(expand((n-rhs(sol[i]))*(n-conjugate(rhs(sol[i]))))))^multiplicities[i])
),
if expand(expr)#expand(fac) then error(),
fac
)$
my_partfrac(e, x) := partfrac(num(e)/factor_with_solve_real(denom(e), x), x);
Robert M.
Dear All, I have the same problem with partfrac like Albert Reiner had:
kovzol <at> pascal:~$ maxima
Maxima 5.13.0 http://maxima.sourceforge.net
Using Lisp CLISP 2.38 (2006-01-24)
Distributed under the GNU Public License. See the file COPYING.
Dedicated to the memory of William Schelter.
This is a development version of Maxima. The function bug_report()
provides bug reporting information.
(%i1) load(simplify_sum)$
(%i2) my_partfrac(e, x) := partfrac(num(e)/factor_with_solve(e, x), x)$
(%i3) my_partfrac(1/(x^4+20*x^2+120), x);
Division by 0
#0: my_partfrac(e=1/(x^4+20*x^2+120),x=x)(simplify_sum.mac line 511)
-- an error. To debug this try debugmode(true);
Am I using a too old version of Maxima?
Best regards, Zoltan
_______________________________________________
Maxima mailing list
Maxima <at> math.utexas.edu
http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima
_______________________________________________ Maxima mailing list Maxima <at> math.utexas.edu http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima
.
>
> Some thoughts:
> Points should described as a list [y,x,z] and vectors as matrix
> matrix([x],[y],[z]).
> I tend to have e.g. a line object, pardon, will say a line list, which
> covers all/some details of describing/plotting a line. Input wellcome...
As far as I know, there are no special packages for analytic geometry, but
basic functions and linear algebra stuff are enough, I think. Introducing new
objects may produce more mess than advantages.
In vector calculus code, Maxima represents vectors as lists; "listarith" works
with lists in appropriate way. Vector plotting is already implemented in
draw2d / draw3d.
RSS Feed