Talk:Computer algebra system: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 22:42, 26 February 2013

Mathematics Start‑class Low‑priority

	Mathematics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-priority on the project's priority scale.

I thought these were called algrebraic manipulators or is that something different? --(talk)BozMo 13:32, 14 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO it's important to show which software packages are free software - what's the point of having wikipedia under the GFDL if we are not going to be supportive of the same sort of freedom in software? Boud 12:18, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I don't quite agree with your reasoning, but I do think that we should include a very short description of the software packages in the list - including its freeness. I tried to mark some more packages as free, but I have some problems with the templates: sometimes, {Free software} renders as Template:Free software (see the article). Any suggestions? -- Jitse Niesen 12:16, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Looks like templates only get properly referenced five times (as of today's date anyway) Boud 15:07, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

,

So we need to discuss this with someone involved in coding...

There's a discussion here: http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=95 Boud 15:17, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

seems resolvedAmcfreely 02:26, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't Magma be listed under algebra, group theory along with GAP? I don't think you can do much else with it...

From five minutes' reading of the wikipedia pages on GAP and Magma, it looks like you're right, but it sounds like you know more about these than i do. IMHO you should make the correction. Boud 13:58, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Done. What's the rule on removing completed discussions? --64.5.123.248 19:51, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Why are the 'numerical' systems Matlab, Octave, MathCad, and SciLab listed here at all? Of these, only Matlab has some symbolic component (it includes a Maple module -- optionally?). The Octave page explicitly says it is not a computer algebra system....--Macrakis 02:36, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I've cut the list of numerical and statistical systems. For the record the list was: MATLAB, GNU Octave, Scilab, Mathcad, S (programming language), R (programming language). Of these, the symbolic capabilities of Matlab are provided by Maple; R has very rudimentary capabilities (I think it can compute derivatives and nothing else), and I don't think the others have any symbolic capabilities at all. So these are out of place in a discussion of algebraic systems. For what it's worth, Wile E. Heresiarch 05:49, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Automatic differentiation link

I think the automatic differentiation link that was just added is out of place here. Automatic differentiation is a technique for numerically maintaining one or more differentials through a calculation. Symbolic methods can be useful in deriving automatic differentiation programs, and for all I know there may be CASs that support automatic differentiation, but it is not specific to CASs. I'd compare this to calculating with numeric intervals -- again, a function which CASs may support (just as they support floating-point arithmetic), but not specific to CASs. Unless someone has a convincing counterargument, I will remove the link in a day or two. --Macrakis 21:40, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Critisim of most CAS systems

As a student of math at college the individual purchases a student version of the software for say $100 but it commonly has an expiration date. Then after graduation it is not really possible for most individuals to continue using the product at the full price of the software since it usually is in the thousands of dollars. This type of policy impedes life long development of many individuals to mature into scientific programmers. It is as harmful to society as high tuition at colleges and overly expensive textbooks. It is oppressive to human attainment of true potential.

71.114.161.229 00:06, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of "Symbolic manipulations" contains "off topic" items

I think that sound synthesis, arbitrary-precision numeric operations, TeX-output, chart drawing etc. are nice to have, but are inadequate under this subtitle. These should be collected under a seprate heading.

--Jkbw (talk) 09:58, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, of course. I just fixed that now. --George Gesslein II (talk) 00:58, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You very much! --Jkbw (talk) 20:15, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

market leader is Mathematica?

The statement

The current market leader is Mathematica[1] which is commonly used by research mathematicians,
scientists, and engineers. Maple, MuPAD and MathCad are other commercial systems.

is based on the phrase

(...) Maple established itself as the leading commercial computer algebra system. However, during the mid-1990s the company ran into trouble and disagreements with his colleagues caused Gonnet to withdraw from managerial involvement. Since then, he feels that Maple has lost its battle with Mathematica.(...)

This is not at all a proof of the statement, which should be reformulated to reflect the fact that Maple and Mathematica are the two most popular CAS. — MFH:Talk 15:01, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Link to experimenal mathematics

I added a linked to Experimental mathematics only to find it removed because of the claim that the results of experimental mathematics are solely numerical. Not true! Computer algebra plays a vital role in this area. If you read the link more carefully, it has a link to computer algebra itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.71.55.250 (talk) 21:56, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image/Sound Processing

If you add that stuff about 'some' being able to process images and sound you'll just cause someone like me to spend the better part of a week looking for one besides Mathematica that does, and probably failing. You may also cause me to redirect the flow of my life so that I can learn to program these things into Sage myself. If someone can tell me of a GPL/LGPL or other FSF CSA that imports JPEGS and WAVS as easily as GIMP or SWEEP, please contact my gmail account: alec dot battles atsymbol gmail dot com. . . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.109.2.118 (talk) 13:03, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect for "Symbolic Algebra"

I have seen the term "symbolic algebra" used in a few places (such as this) as a synonym for "abstract algebra". Should Symbolic algebra auto-redirect to this page as it does, or does it need a disambiguation page? (Personally, I came here expecting a redirect to Abstract algebra, and I'm a computer scientist.) TricksterWolf (talk) 21:33, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IBM PL/I Formac Interpreter

My intention is to add a paragraph referencing the IBM work done by Dr. Robert G. Tobey in developing the IBM PL/I Formac Interpreter. From page 3 of the documenation: "The most basic and important capability of FORMAC is its accomodation of mathematical expressions as symbolic entities at execution time." I believe that this work falls squarely under this wikipedia topic and should be included. I am adding this topic under the talk section to see if anyone has any comments. 97.86.236.127 (talk) 23:56, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know FORMAC is completely out of date and has not been maintained since around 1975 or before. I have used it around 1970. If it should be mentioned in this article, this can only be done in a history section, together with many other dead systems. It is notable only as the first computer algebra system that has been made accessible to users that were not close to the developers (as I was circa 1970). It is somewhat a stub of computer algebra system, as not having arbitrary precision integers nor simplification of fractions of polynomials. D.Lazard (talk) 04:36, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Does not sound like you are opposed. And certainly under the history section; a few sentences then. 97.86.236.127 (talk) 04:38, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Which tools offer Matrix Calculus, Tensor Calculus, Full Risch algorithm, etc.

I was hoping for a breakdown of more advanced features such as Matrix Calculus (taking the derivative of an expression with respect to a matrix or matrix entry)

@@ Line 88: / Line 88: @@
 :As far as I know FORMAC is completely out of date and has not been maintained since around 1975 or before. I have used it around 1970. If it should be mentioned in this article, this can only be done in a history section, together with many other dead systems. It is notable only as the first computer algebra system that has been made accessible to users that were not close to the developers (as I was circa 1970). It is somewhat a stub of computer algebra system, as not having arbitrary precision integers nor simplification of fractions of polynomials. [[User:D.Lazard|D.Lazard]] ([[User talk:D.Lazard|talk]]) 04:36, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
 :Does not sound like you are opposed. And certainly under the history section; a few sentences then. [[Special:Contributions/97.86.236.127|97.86.236.127]] ([[User talk:97.86.236.127|talk]]) 04:38, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
+== Which tools offer Matrix Calculus, Tensor Calculus, Full Risch algorithm, etc. ==
+I was hoping for a breakdown of more advanced features such as Matrix Calculus (taking the derivative of an expression with respect to a matrix or matrix entry)