
Re: Charlwood Fifty test results
Posted:
Jul 6, 2013 5:55 AM


Albert Rich schrieb: > > Following is a table comparing the results produced by 6 symbolic > integrators on the Charlwood Fifty testsuite: > > Charlwood Fifty Test Results > # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 > 1 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 > 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 > 3 0 0 2 1 0 2 1 > 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 > 5 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 > 6 2 2 2 0 1 2 0 > 7 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 > 8 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 > 9 2 2 2 1 2 0 2 > 10 2 2 2 1 0 2 0 > [...] > > In summary, the column labels and total scores for the 7 systems > tested are as follows: > > 1. 66 Rubi 4.0 > 2. 85 Rubi 4.1 > 3. 75 FriCAS 1.2.1 > 4. 73 Mathematica 9 > 5. 71 Derive 6.1 > 6. 49 Maple 17 > 7. 40 Maxima 5.28.02 >
Your results for Mathematica 9.01 (column 4) appear to be incompatible with Nasser's results for problems 1 to 10 at
<http://www.12000.org/my_notes/ten_hard_integrals/index.htm>
According to Nasser, Mathematica fails entirely on problem 5, and succeeds on problems 6,7,8,9 only in terms of nonelementary functions (elliptic integrals). According to your table, Mathematica succeeds suboptimally on problems 5,7,9 and fails on problems 6,8.
Similarly, Nasser reports Maple 17 to fail on problems 9,10, whereas you report (column 6) a failure for problem 9 and a full success for problem 10.
Martin.

