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: Who is fastest AND optimal?
Replies: 9   Last Post: May 6, 2016 2:29 PM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Albert D. Rich Posts: 311 From: Hawaii Island Registered: 5/30/09
Re: Who is fastest AND optimal?
Posted: May 2, 2016 10:48 PM

On Saturday, April 30, 2016 at 9:49:41 PM UTC-10, clicl...@freenet.de wrote:
> 16*3 = 48 rules; but distinguishing polynomials by degree only, this
> would better be counted as 3*3 = 9 rules.

If you are really curious about the need for the new rules in Rubi 4.92, you can compare the current source now posted on Rubi's website with the previous source.

> It seems to be settled in your mind by now that Rubi's pattern-matching
> activities should be quickly forgotten once version 5 is out and stable.

I would dearly love to forget Rubi 4, but in addition to manually compiling 6000+ pattern-matching rules into a decision-tree, there is a lot of other work to do before Rubi 5 is ready for prime-time:

1. In order for Rubi 5 to display integration steps, like Rubi 4 does, will require implementing an if-then-else tree interpreter that can reconstruct the rule's application conditions as it descends through the tree so they can be displayed to the user.

2. In order to display Rubi 5's rule-based decision-tree in human-readable form, like the list of pattern-matching rules currently displayed on the website, will require reconstructing the rules implicitly stored in the tree and storing them as a list of pattern-matching rules.

> On that occasion, you may thus even think of renaming Rubi and
> restarting at version 1 :).

No, I think "Rubi" is a great name for a rule-based integrator, no matter whether the rules are selected using pattern-matching or a decision-tree.

Albert