Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    sci.math.symbolic    |    Symbolic algebra discussion    |    10,432 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 9,738 of 10,432    |
|    Richard Fateman to Albert Rich    |
|    Re: question on Rubi and special functio    |
|    15 Dec 17 10:39:05    |
      From: fateman@cs.berkeley.edu              On 12/13/2017 8:50 PM, Albert Rich wrote:              >       > No, if all the application conditions of any of Rubi's 6000+ integration       rules is satisfied, the result of applying that rule will be a mathematically       valid antiderivative.       >       > If the simplification and expansion functions defined in Sympy's utility       file for Rubi do not exactly mimic Mathematica's, the resulting        ntiderivatives may not be quite as concise as those produced by Rubi running       on Mathematica, but they still will        terminate and be mathematically correct.              I suspect that the issue I encountered was that intermediate results       from some of the rules (part-way toward the final result) were in       unanticipated (less concise?) forms than expected, and this inhibited       the appropriate application of additional rules.       Whether something like this happens in sympy, or whether this suspicion       is just wrong, I don't know.       Translating the rules to if-then-else programs would probably eliminate       some of the problems related to matching per se, and maybe solve some of the       sympy issues.              RJF                                   >       > Albert       >              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca