SMath Studio Forum
»
SMath Studio
»
Bugs & Problems
»
[Custom Functions] Substitution in expressions with dummy variables (diff, sum etc.)
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Registered
Joined: 15/04/2012(UTC) Posts: 1,990 Was thanked: 1128 time(s) in 724 post(s)
|
Consider the following example. Substitution using at() is applied to a symbolic expression. Once f(t) is not defined, the derivative can't be calculated. It is nice, that t is not just replaced by 0 but the result anyways is not correct. The return value should be the unmodified input expression if evaluation/simplification fails. You see the problem if you evaluate input and return value for a particular f(x), the results aren't equal. Blatt20.sm (6kb) downloaded 7 time(s). |
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Registered
Joined: 28/08/2014(UTC) Posts: 1,370 Was thanked: 829 time(s) in 525 post(s)
|
I don't know what the intention of the author of the at() function is, but what I can observe in other CAS is that there are always something like two versions for the substitution, in which perhaps one maybe returns the expected results. My opinion is that the only procedure about which it can be said that the substitution is correct or not is the limit operation Maybe Maxima can redefine at() using limits. Best regards. Alvaro. Edited by user 26 July 2023 23:55:58(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified
|
1 user thanked Razonar for this useful post.
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Registered
Joined: 15/04/2012(UTC) Posts: 1,990 Was thanked: 1128 time(s) in 724 post(s)
|
Whatever I do on Maxima side, if the result contains a symbolic non-simplificable substitution (can happen with laplace transforms) then I'd like to display that using the at() function with it's nice operator form to display the result. Yet, as of now, the function isn't robust enough for this. In the example below you see that the return value from Maxima contains an expression with at(), which is removed on SMath postprocessing side even if optimization=none. It is part of the test suite for Maxima in the interactive handbook or on github. The limit function, by the way is another construction site. Currently, it is not possible to use the single-sided limits. We have that on our todo list. |
|
1 user thanked mkraska for this useful post.
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Registered, Advanced Member Joined: 13/01/2012(UTC) Posts: 2,654 Location: Italy Was thanked: 1340 time(s) in 879 post(s)
|
Hi Martin,
I think I can handle it plugin-side, I'll look into it ASAP. |
If you like my plugins consider to support SMath Studio buying a plan; to offer me a coffee: paypal.me/dcprojects |
1 user thanked Davide Carpi for this useful post.
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC) Posts: 6,866 Was thanked: 981 time(s) in 809 post(s)
|
Originally Posted by: mkraska You see the problem if you evaluate input and return value for a particular f(x), the results aren't equal. Pretty obvious that f(x):= sin(0.5*x) evaluation t=0 will not be same. Vectorize over t[0,0.125..pi]
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC) Posts: 6,866 Was thanked: 981 time(s) in 809 post(s)
|
By same token of diff at(2) 1. 1rst derivative of erf(x) is the integrand. that you derive D(n,x) at will, range/vectorize. 2. Derivative of Gamma(x) from infinitesimal analysis.
|
|
|
|
SMath Studio Forum
»
SMath Studio
»
Bugs & Problems
»
[Custom Functions] Substitution in expressions with dummy variables (diff, sum etc.)
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.