Date: Jul 16, 2013 4:05 AM
Author: daly@axiom-developer.org
Subject: Re: An independent integration test suite
On Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:00:13 AM UTC-4, da...@axiom-developer.org wrote:

> On Tuesday, July 16, 2013 2:19:26 AM UTC-4, Albert Rich wrote:

>

> > On Monday, July 15, 2013 9:36:04 AM UTC-10, da...@axiom-developer.org wrote:

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > > In order to ensure that the answers of the integration differ by no

>

> >

>

> > > more than a constant I've been differencing the expected answer from

>

> >

>

> > > the Axiom answer and then taking the derivative.

>

> >

>

> > >

>

> >

>

> > > One curious pattern is that your answers differ from Axiom's answers

>

> >

>

> > > by non-zero constants. [...]

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > The first sentence above correctly asserts that it is ok for antiderivatives to differ by a constant. Yet, the second sentence finds it surprising that they do differ. So what is the problem?

>

> >

>

> >

>

> >

>

> > Albert

>

>

>

> suppose

>

> t0:= expression

>

> r0:= expected result

>

> a0:= integrate(t0,x)

>

> m0:= a0 - r0

>

> d0:= differentiate(m0,x)

>

>

>

> m0 is the difference between Axiom's result and the expected result.

>

> d0 is the derivative of m0, usually with a value of 0.

>

>

>

> m0 often shows that Axiom's result and the expected result differ

>

> and the derivative result of 0 shows that this is just a constant.

>

>

>

> When I look at the reason for the constant difference it seems to be

>

> related to the trig identities we chose. What system did you use to

>

> create the expected results?

That last was just a dumb question... you used Rubi, no doubt.

What I wanted to ask was what trig substitutions you use.

Is there somewhere in the Rubi sources I should look?