Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: The Charlwood Fifty
Replies: 52   Last Post: Jun 24, 2013 10:24 PM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Nasser Abbasi Posts: 6,677 Registered: 2/7/05
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 UTC-10, 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 test-suite 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