
Re: The Charlwood Fifty
Posted:
Jun 9, 2013 10:38 PM


On 6/9/2013 4:58 AM, Albert Rich wrote: > On Saturday, June 8, 2013 11:12:56 AM UTC10, clicl...@freenet.de wrote: > >> Albert Rich schrieb: >> >>> [...] Presumably only a finite number of improvements are possible... >> >> Are you sure? [...] > > You are severely testing my cherished belief that optimality exists... :=) > > I just posted a revised Charlwood Fifty testsuite at > > http://www.apmaths.uwo.ca/~arich/CharlwoodIntegrationProblems.pdf > > that includes your most recent antiderivatives for problems #41, #42 and #44. Please disregard the 8 previous versions. > > Albert >
fyi;
I've update the listing of the first 10 integrals. Added your optimal results there, and also added result from Sage 5.4.
http://www.12000.org/my_notes/ten_hard_integrals/index.htm
Each integral is now on a separate web page instead of them all on the same page to make it easier to see the results of each.
There is also a pdf file.
Here is a quick summary of the first 10 integral results, I just counted if CAS gave result or not. No checking for anything else. Some results are clearly not optimal and few results take many pages.
1. Mathematica: did 1,2,3,4,6,8,9,10 did not: 5,7 2. Maple: did 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 did not: 9,10 3. Rubi4: did 2,3(?),4,5,6,7,8,9,10 did not: 1 4. Sage: did: 1,2,3,4,7,9 did not: 5,6,8,10
I do not understand Rubi4 result for 3. I do not know what Subst[....] is supposed to mean, but I have not looked it up, I am sure it is explained somewhere. Any errors, please let me know.
Nasser

