User Activity

  • Posted a comment on ticket #4004 on Maxima -- GPL CAS based on DOE-MACSYMA

    I don't think it's sufficient to try to fix the problem at the point where RATLIM currently thinks the limit is 0 (although it would certainly be an improvement). For example, this limit should be 2 when a is 0, but RATLIM currently says that the limit is 1, whether there is an assumption or not (and will not ask any questions if you omit the assume): (%i1) assume(equal(a, 0)); (%o1) [equal(a, 0)] (%i2) limit((2*x + a)/(x + a), x, 0); (%o2) 1 So it seems to me that it would be better to fix loco...

  • Posted a comment on ticket #4004 on Maxima -- GPL CAS based on DOE-MACSYMA

    Thanks! I know very little lisp, but I am able to understand the gist of the RATLIM function: to calculate a limit x -> 0 (or x ->zeroa) of a rational function, we just need to know the coefficient of the lowest-order term in the numerator and denominator. I think the best option would be to modify the locoef function to check whether the result is actually nonzero, and continue looking if it is not. Another alternative would be for RATLIM to check whether (locoef n g) and (locoef d g) are zero....

  • Posted a comment on ticket #4004 on Maxima -- GPL CAS based on DOE-MACSYMA

    Thanks for looking at this. Based on your last message, I found a much simpler example: (%i1) assume(equal(a, 0)); (%o1) [equal(a,0)] (%i2) limit(a/x + 1, x, 0); (%o2) 0

  • Created ticket #4004 on Maxima -- GPL CAS based on DOE-MACSYMA

    a cosine of arcsin limit that is evaluated incorrectly

  • Posted a comment on ticket #3940 on Maxima -- GPL CAS based on DOE-MACSYMA

    In case it helps, the problem (surprisingly!) does not seem to arise when the constant is negative: (%i1) load("simplify_sum"); for k: -5 while k <= 5 do print(simplify_sum(sum(binomial(n,s) * (x + k)^s * x^(n-s), s, 0, n))); (%o1) (2*x-5)^n (2*x-4)^n (2*x-3)^n (2*x-2)^n (2*x-1)^n 2^n*x^n 2^n*x^n 2^n*x^n 2^n*x^n 2^n*x^n 2^n*x^n

  • Created ticket #3940 on Maxima -- GPL CAS based on DOE-MACSYMA

    simplify_sum (Zeilberger method) computes incorrect answer

  • Created ticket #3865 on Maxima -- GPL CAS based on DOE-MACSYMA

    crash from taking limit of factorial(x) + 1

  • Posted a comment on ticket #3788 on Maxima -- GPL CAS based on DOE-MACSYMA

    I think the verbose output that is copied below shows that the problem is a wrong initial condition for Zeilberger's method. Maxima says the initial condition is sm[0] = 0, but I think this needs to be sm[1] = 1, because the recurrence relation sm[n]*(t+1) - sm[n+1] = 0 is not valid for n = 0. (%i15) verbose_level: 100; (verbose_level) 100 (%i16) load("simplify_sum"); (%o16) /Applications/Maxima.app/Contents/Resources/opt/share/maxima/5.43.0/share/solve_rec/simplify_sum.mac (%i17) simplify_sum(sum(t^(k-1)*binomial(n-1,...

View All

Personal Data

Username:
davewittemorris
Joined:
2021-05-27 00:50:11

Projects

  • No projects to display.

Personal Tools