Verifying DLMF with Maple and Mathematica: Difference between revisions
m Admin moved page Main Page to Verifying DLMF with Maple and Mathematica |
Tag: Undo |
||
(39 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
This | This wiki provides an overview of LaCASt, our LaTeX to Computer Algebra Systems (CAS) Translator, and its translations of the [https://dlmf.nist.gov/ Digital Library of Mathematical Functions (DLMF)]. | ||
Specifically, we provide access to the translations for Maple and Mathematica. Additionally, each translation was verified with symbolic and numeric evaluation techniques. | |||
In the following, we present the results of our translations and evaluations. | |||
For legal inquiries, use the methods described at https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/. | |||
= Bug Reports = | |||
We provide the same file | You can find a PDF with commands that illustrate the encountered errors in [https://www.wolfram.com/mathematica/ Mathematica] here: [[File:Mathematica Bugs Overview.pdf|none|The overview of the bugs we reported to Mathematica]] | ||
We provide the same file in the [https://reference.wolfram.com/language/ref/format/NB.html Wolfram system notebook format (NB)] here: | |||
[[File:Mathematica Bugs Notebook File.nb|The Wolfram notebook file of the reported bugs]] | [[File:Mathematica Bugs Notebook File.nb|The Wolfram notebook file of the reported bugs]] | ||
== DLMF Translations and Results == | = DLMF Translations and Results = | ||
This section explains the data you can access. Below, you will find a large table that shows the overall results of translations, symbolic and numeric verifications, as well as a number of errors and aborted calculations for each DLMF chapter. Before you move on to investigating the results, please have a look at how to read the data first. | |||
== How to read the data? == | |||
The data on this website can be considered as an extension of the [https://dlmf.nist.gov/ DLMF] but not a copy. Some labeled equations in the DLMF do not appear in this data because they were skipped or caused translation errors in both systems (Maple and Mathematica). In addition, the result tables on this website do not provide context! For checking the context, every equation in our dataset is linked directly to the equation in the DLMF. You can access the original DLMF equation by clicking on the label in the most-left column in the result tables. | |||
You can access the results by clicking on a particular chapter below. This will load a page showing links to each section. Red links indicate that this section is empty, i.e., no results are available for that section. Clicking on a blue-inked link will load the result table for that section. Below you see an example of such a table with just two equations from different chapters. As you can see, the first entry [https://dlmf.nist.gov/4.12.E1 4.12.E1] is grayed out. This happens when the entry was skipped due to missing semantic macros in the source of the test case (flagged as <code>Skipped - no semantic math</code>). You can see the actual semantic LaTeX source of every test case below the equation. Since most of these cases are not translated properly by LCT, we skipped them directly, i.e., they were not further processed for symbolic or numeric evaluations. In fact, those cases have not even been translated into our pipeline. However, we added the translations just for our result tables because they may provide further interesting insights into the translation process. | |||
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; column-count:2;"> | |||
The most-right columns in the table show the numeric evaluation results. If an equation was not numerically verified, it shows <code>Failed [x/y]</code> where <math>x</math> is the number of failed calculations and <math>y</math> is the number of all test calculations for this test case. As you can see in the second entry below [https://dlmf.nist.gov/11.5.E2 11.5.E2], 15 test calculations failed out of 25, so 10 were successful. When you click on the little <code>Expand</code>, we show the first couple of results for the failed test cases. Since the tables are already very large, we cannot show all failed test calculations. | |||
Clicking on <code>expand</code> for the second entry in our example table below, we see the test result and the test values that produced this result. As explained in the paper, the calculation was simply performed on the difference of the left- and right-hand sides of the equation <code>LHS - RHS</code>. Further explanations on why this test failed can be found in the paper. | |||
<div class="toccolours">Failed [15 / 25] | |||
<syntaxhighlight lang=mathematica>Result: Complex[0.9495382353861556, -0.46093572348323536] | |||
Test Values: {Rule[z, Power[E, Times[Complex[0, Rational[1, 6]], Pi]]], Rule[ν, 1.5]}</syntaxhighlight> | |||
<syntaxhighlight lang=mathematica>Result: Complex[0.7706973036767981, -0.20650772012904173] | |||
Test Values: {Rule[z, Power[E, Times[Complex[0, Rational[1, 6]], Pi]]], Rule[ν, 0.5]}</syntaxhighlight>... skip entries to safe data</div> | |||
</div> | |||
<br> | |||
<div style="width: 100%; overflow: auto;"> | |||
{| class="wikitable sortable" style="margin: 0;" | |||
|- | |||
! scope="col" style="position: sticky; top: 0;" | DLMF | |||
! scope="col" style="position: sticky; top: 0;" | Formula | |||
! scope="col" style="position: sticky; top: 0;" | Constraints | |||
! scope="col" style="position: sticky; top: 0;" | Maple | |||
! scope="col" style="position: sticky; top: 0;" | Mathematica | |||
! scope="col" style="position: sticky; top: 0;" | Symbolic<br>Maple | |||
! scope="col" style="position: sticky; top: 0;" | Symbolic<br>Mathematica | |||
! scope="col" style="position: sticky; top: 0;" | Numeric<br>Maple | |||
! scope="col" style="position: sticky; top: 0;" | Numeric<br>Mathematica | |||
|- | |||
|- style="background: #dfe6e9;" | |||
| [https://dlmf.nist.gov/4.12.E1 4.12.E1] || [[Item:Q1629|<math>\phi(x+1) = e^{\phi(x)}</math>]]<br><syntaxhighlight lang="tex" style="font-size: 75%; background: inherit;" inline>\phi(x+1) = e^{\phi(x)}</syntaxhighlight> || <math>-1 < x, x < \infty</math> || <div class="mw-highlight mw-highlight-lang-mathematica mw-content-ltr" dir="ltr"><pre style="background: inherit;">phi(x + 1) = exp(phi(x))</pre></div> || <div class="mw-highlight mw-highlight-lang-mathematica mw-content-ltr" dir="ltr"><pre style="background: inherit;">\[Phi][x + 1] == Exp[\[Phi][x]]</pre></div> || Skipped - no semantic math || Skipped - no semantic math || - || - | |||
|- | |||
| [https://dlmf.nist.gov/11.5.E2 11.5.E2] || [[Item:Q3969|<math>\StruveK{\nu}@{z} = \frac{2(\tfrac{1}{2}z)^{\nu}}{\sqrt{\pi}\EulerGamma@{\nu+\tfrac{1}{2}}}\int_{0}^{\infty}e^{-zt}(1+t^{2})^{\nu-\frac{1}{2}}\diff{t}</math>]]<br><syntaxhighlight lang="tex" style="font-size: 75%;" inline>\StruveK{\nu}@{z} = \frac{2(\tfrac{1}{2}z)^{\nu}}{\sqrt{\pi}\EulerGamma@{\nu+\tfrac{1}{2}}}\int_{0}^{\infty}e^{-zt}(1+t^{2})^{\nu-\frac{1}{2}}\diff{t}</syntaxhighlight> || <math>\realpart@@{z} > 0, \realpart@@{(\nu+\tfrac{1}{2})} > 0, \realpart@@{(\nu+k+1)} > 0, \realpart@@{((-\nu)+k+1)} > 0, \realpart@@{(n+\nu+\tfrac{3}{2})} > 0</math> || <syntaxhighlight lang=mathematica>StruveH(nu, z) - BesselY(nu, z) = (2*((1)/(2)*z)^(nu))/(sqrt(Pi)*GAMMA(nu +(1)/(2)))*int(exp(- z*t)*(1 + (t)^(2))^(nu -(1)/(2)), t = 0..infinity)</syntaxhighlight> || <syntaxhighlight lang=mathematica>StruveH[\[Nu], z] - BesselY[\[Nu], z] == Divide[2*(Divide[1,2]*z)^\[Nu],Sqrt[Pi]*Gamma[\[Nu]+Divide[1,2]]]*Integrate[Exp[- z*t]*(1 + (t)^(2))^(\[Nu]-Divide[1,2]), {t, 0, Infinity}, GenerateConditions->None]</syntaxhighlight> || Successful || Successful || - || <div class="toccolours mw-collapsible mw-collapsed">Failed [15 / 25]<div class="mw-collapsible-content"><syntaxhighlight lang=mathematica>Result: Complex[0.9495382353861556, -0.46093572348323536] | |||
Test Values: {Rule[z, Power[E, Times[Complex[0, Rational[1, 6]], Pi]]], Rule[ν, 1.5]}</syntaxhighlight><br><syntaxhighlight lang=mathematica>Result: Complex[0.7706973036767981, -0.20650772012904173] | |||
Test Values: {Rule[z, Power[E, Times[Complex[0, Rational[1, 6]], Pi]]], Rule[ν, 0.5]}</syntaxhighlight><br>... skip entries to safe data</div></div> | |||
|} | |||
</div> | |||
As a summary, here is an explanation for every column of the result tables. | |||
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; column-count:2;"> | |||
; DLMF : Contains the equation label as a link to the actual equation in the DLMF. Click on the label if you need to check the context of a formula in the DLMF. | |||
; Formula : Contains the rendered formula and the actual semantic LaTeX source (sometimes also referred to as content-tex). More information about the semantic (or content) LaTeX can be found in <ref name="Abdou2020">Abdou Youssef and Bruce R. Miller, "A Contextual and Labeled Math-Dataset Derived from NIST's DLMF." In: Intelligent Computer Mathematics (CICM) 2020: 324-330. DOI: [https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53518-6\_25 10.1007/978-3-030-53518-6_25]</ref> | |||
; Constraints : This shows the constraints that LCT has generated by analyzing the definitions of the functions that are included in the equation. This also includes the constraints that are directly attached to a test case. For example, [https://dlmf.nist.gov/11.5.E2 11.5.E2] only has the constraint <math>\realpart@@{z} > 0</math>. LCT followed the definitions of the involved functions and identified several more constraints for this test case. A detailed explanation of this process was given in the paper. Note, however, that this list of constraints does not contain the manually defined global constraints that we applied for all test cases (as shown in Table 3 in the paper). This way, the result tables only show what LCT generated and applied for the numeric evaluations. | |||
; Maple : The translation to Maple | |||
; Mathematica : The translation to Mathematica | |||
; Symbolic (Maple / Mathematica) : The result of the symbolic evaluation. If this was skipped, no calculations have been performed on the test case. | |||
; Numeric (Maple / Mathematica) : The result of the numeric evaluation as explained above and in the paper. | |||
</div> | |||
== Links to the data == | |||
In the following, we present an overview of the translations of the [https://dlmf.nist.gov/ DLMF] equations to the CAS [https://www.maplesoft.com/ Maple] and [https://www.wolfram.com/mathematica/ Mathematica]. | |||
{| class="wikitable sortable" | |||
|- | |||
! DLMF !! Formula !! Translations<br>Maple !! Translations<br>Mathematica !! Symbolic Evaluation<br>Maple !! Symbolic Evaluation<br>Mathematica !! Numeric Evaluation<br>Maple !! Numeric Evaluation<br>Mathematica | |||
|- | |||
| [https://dlmf.nist.gov/ DLMF] || 6,545 || 4,114 (62.9%) || 4,713 (72.0%) || 1,084 (26.3%) || 1,235 (26.2%) || 698 (26.7%) || 784 (22.6%) | |||
|- | |||
|} | |||
The following links provide access to all results for each DLMF chapter. This will show the sections in each chapter. Please notice that many sections in a chapter might be empty (indicated by a red link color instead of a blue link). This happens when all formulae in a section have been skipped or the case analyzer was not able to parse the expression properly. In some cases, the section simply did not contain any formula. | |||
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; column-count:2;"> | |||
# [[Results of Algebraic and Analytic Methods|Algebraic and Analytic Methods]] | |||
# [[Results of Asymptotic Approximations|Asymptotic Approximations]] | |||
# [[Results of Numerical Methods|Numerical Methods]] | |||
# [[Results of Elementary Functions|Elementary Functions]] | |||
# [[Results of Gamma Function|Gamma Function]] | |||
# [[Results of Exponential, Logarithmic, Sine, and Cosine Integrals|Exponential, Logarithmic, Sine, and Cosine Integrals]] | |||
# [[Results of Error Functions, Dawson’s and Fresnel Integrals|Error Functions, Dawson’s and Fresnel Integrals]] | |||
# [[Results of Incomplete Gamma and Related Functions|Incomplete Gamma and Related Functions]] | |||
# [[Results of Airy and Related Functions|Airy and Related Functions]] | |||
# [[Results of Bessel Functions|Bessel Functions]] | |||
# [[Results of Struve and Related Functions|Struve and Related Functions]] | |||
# [[Results of Parabolic Cylinder Functions|Parabolic Cylinder Functions]] | |||
# [[Results of Confluent Hypergeometric Functions|Confluent Hypergeometric Functions]] | |||
# [[Results of Legendre and Related Functions|Legendre and Related Functions]] | |||
# [[Results of Hypergeometric Function|Hypergeometric Function]] | |||
# [[Results of Generalized Hypergeometric Functions and Meijer G-Function|Generalized Hypergeometric Functions and Meijer ''G''-Function]] | |||
# [[Results of q-Hypergeometric and Related Functions|''q''-Hypergeometric and Related Functions]] | |||
# [[Results of Orthogonal Polynomials|Orthogonal Polynomials]] | |||
# [[Results of Elliptic Integrals|Elliptic Integrals]] | |||
# [[Results of Theta Functions|Theta Functions]] | |||
# [[Results of Multidimensional Theta Functions|Multidimensional Theta Functions]] | |||
# [[Results of Jacobian Elliptic Functions|Jacobian Elliptic Functions]] | |||
# [[Results of Weierstrass Elliptic and Modular Functions|Weierstrass Elliptic and Modular Functions]] | |||
# [[Results of Bernoulli and Euler Polynomials|Bernoulli and Euler Polynomials]] | |||
# [[Results of Zeta and Related Functions|Zeta and Related Functions]] | |||
# [[Results of Combinatorial Analysis|Combinatorial Analysis]] | |||
# [[Results of Functions of Number Theory|Functions of Number Theory]] | |||
# [[Results of Mathieu Functions and Hill’s Equation|Mathieu Functions and Hill’s Equation]] | |||
# [[Results of Lamé Functions|Lamé Functions]] | |||
# [[Results of Spheroidal Wave Functions|Spheroidal Wave Functions]] | |||
# [[Results of Heun Functions|Heun Functions]] | |||
# [[Results of Painlevé Transcendents|Painlevé Transcendents]] | |||
# [[Results of Coulomb Functions|Coulomb Functions]] | |||
# [[Results of 3j,6j,9j Symbols|''3j,6j,9j'' Symbols]] | |||
# [[Results of Functions of Matrix Argument|Functions of Matrix Argument]] | |||
# [[Results of Integrals with Coalescing Saddles|Integrals with Coalescing Saddles]] | |||
</div> | |||
=== Examples === | |||
To provide you a starting point to investigate the data above, we suggest [[15.4|Hypergeometric Function - 15.4 Special Cases]]. For example, [https://dlmf.nist.gov/15.4#E28 15.4.E28] | |||
:<math>\hyperF@{a}{b}{\tfrac{1}{2}a+\tfrac{1}{2}b+\tfrac{1}{2}}{\tfrac{1}{2}} = \sqrt{\pi}\frac{\EulerGamma@{\tfrac{1}{2}a+\tfrac{1}{2}b+\tfrac{1}{2}}}{\EulerGamma@{\tfrac{1}{2}a+\tfrac{1}{2}}\EulerGamma@{\tfrac{1}{2}b+\tfrac{1}{2}}}</math> | |||
was successfully translated to Maple and Mathematica and verified symbolically and numerically in both systems despite the complexity of such a test case. | |||
{| class="wikitable" | |||
|- | |||
! Maple !! Mathematica | |||
|- | |||
| <syntaxhighlight lang=mathematica>hypergeom([a, b], [(1)/(2)*a +(1)/(2)*b +(1)/(2)], (1)/(2)) = sqrt(Pi)*(GAMMA((1)/(2)*a +(1)/(2)*b +(1)/(2)))/(GAMMA((1)/(2)*a +(1)/(2))*GAMMA((1)/(2)*b +(1)/(2)))</syntaxhighlight> || <syntaxhighlight lang=mathematica>Hypergeometric2F1[a, b, Divide[1,2]*a +Divide[1,2]*b +Divide[1,2], Divide[1,2]] == Sqrt[Pi]*Divide[Gamma[Divide[1,2]*a +Divide[1,2]*b +Divide[1,2]],Gamma[Divide[1,2]*a +Divide[1,2]]*Gamma[Divide[1,2]*b +Divide[1,2]]]</syntaxhighlight> | |||
|} | |||
Another interesting section might be [[26.3|Combinatorial Analysis - 26.3 Lattice Paths: Binomial Coefficients]]. All expressions are relatively straight-forward. Nonetheless, [https://dlmf.nist.gov/26.3#E8 23.3.E8] | |||
:<math>\binom{m}{n} = \sum_{k=0}^{n}\binom{m-n-1+k}{k}</math> | |||
failed numerically. This test case failed because Mathematica simplified the right-hand side directly to <math>\frac{(1+n) {m \choose n+1}}{m-n}</math> which would result in a division by zero for <math>m = n</math>. Indeed, our result table show that the test evaluation failed for <math>m=n=1</math> and <math>m=n=2</math> (the last case <math>m=n=3</math> was omitted because we only show the first two failed calculations to reduce the size of the result tables). This simple example shows the challenge of interpreting the data and working with computer algebra systems. | |||
== Translations and Evaluations Overview Table == | |||
{| class="wikitable" | |||
! !! Meaning | |||
|- | |||
! 2C | |||
| Chapter Code | |||
|- | |||
! S | |||
| Successful | |||
|- | |||
! % | |||
| Percentage | |||
|- | |||
! F | |||
| Fail | |||
|- | |||
! P/T | |||
| Partially / Totally Failed | |||
|- | |||
! A | |||
| Aborted | |||
|- | |||
! E | |||
| Errors | |||
|- | |||
! Base | |||
| The baseline performance of the translator | |||
|- | |||
! Maple | |||
| The CAS Maple 2020 | |||
|- | |||
! Mathematica | |||
| The CAS Mathematica | |||
|} | |||
{| class="wikitable sortable" style="text-align: right;" | |||
! colspan="5" | | |||
! colspan="6" | Symbolic | |||
! colspan="12" | Numeric | |||
|- | |||
! colspan="2" | Formulae | |||
! colspan="3" | Translations | |||
! colspan="3" | Maple | |||
! colspan="3" | Mathematica | |||
! colspan="6" | Maple | |||
! colspan="6" | Mathematica | |||
|- | |||
! 2C !! Total !! Base !! Maple !! Math !! S !! % !! F !! S !! % !! F !! S !! % !! F !! [P/T] !! A !! E !! S !! % !! F !! [P/T] !! A !! E | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 1. [[Results of Algebraic and Analytic Methods|AL]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 227 | |||
|| 60 || 102 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 103 | |||
|| 36 || 35.3% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 60 | |||
|| 34 || 33.0% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 69 | |||
|| 14 || 23.3% || 35 || [ 12 / 23] || 7 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 4 | |||
|| 14 || 20.3% || 40 || [ 9 / 31] || 11 || 4 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 2. [[Results of Asymptotic Approximations|AS]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 136 | |||
|| 33 || 65 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 65 | |||
|| 6 || 9.2% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 47 | |||
|| 6 || 9.2% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 59 | |||
|| 7 || 14.9% || 33 || [ 5 / 28] || 1 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 5 | |||
|| 4 || 6.8% || 38 || [ 6 / 32] || 7 || 9 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 3. [[Results of Numerical Methods|NM]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 53 | |||
|| 36 || 40 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 40 | |||
|| 6 || 15.0% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 31 | |||
|| 5 || 12.5% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 35 | |||
|| 1 || 3.2% || 27 || [ 9 / 18] || 0 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 2 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% || 29 || [ 8 / 21] || 6 || 0 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 4. [[Results of Elementary Functions|EF]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 569 | |||
|| 353 || 494 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 564 | |||
|| 270 || 54.7% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 221 | |||
|| 304 || 53.9% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 260 | |||
|| 88 || 39.8% || 126 || [ 64 / 62] || 0 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 6 | |||
|| 110 || 42.3% || 146 || [ 55 / 91] || 2 || 0 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 5. [[Results of Gamma Function|GA]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 144 | |||
|| 38 || 130 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 139 | |||
|| 41 || 31.5% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 76 | |||
|| 65 || 46.8% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 74 | |||
|| 39 || 51.3% || 25 || [ 12 / 13] || 4 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 8 | |||
|| 30 || 40.5% || 20 || [ 9 / 11] || 13 || 9 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 6. [[Results of Exponential, Logarithmic, Sine, and Cosine Integrals|EX]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 107 | |||
|| 21 || 56 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 77 | |||
|| 13 || 23.2% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 43 | |||
|| 18 || 23.4% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 59 | |||
|| 10 || 23.2% || 31 || [ 13 / 18] || 0 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 2 | |||
|| 23 || 39.0% || 32 || [ 6 / 26] || 4 || 0 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 7. [[Results of Error Functions, Dawson’s and Fresnel Integrals|ER]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 149 | |||
|| 35 || 101 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 120 | |||
|| 52 || 51.5% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 47 | |||
|| 45 || 37.5% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 75 | |||
|| 21 || 44.7% || 23 || [ 10 / 13] || 2 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 1 | |||
|| 21 || 28.0% || 43 || [ 13 / 30] || 9 || 1 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 8. [[Results of Incomplete Gamma and Related Functions|IG]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 204 | |||
|| 84 || 160 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 163 | |||
|| 51 || 31.9% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 102 | |||
|| 65 || 39.9% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 98 | |||
|| 27 || 26.5% || 61 || [ 20 / 41] || 9 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 5 | |||
|| 22 || 22.4% || 44 || [ 19 / 25] || 16 || 15 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 9. [[Results of Airy and Related Functions|AI]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 235 | |||
|| 36 || 180 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 179 | |||
|| 54 || 30.0% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 124 | |||
|| 69 || 38.5% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 110 | |||
|| 34 || 27.4% || 75 || [ 41 / 34] || 4 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 8 | |||
|| 30 || 27.3% || 58 || [ 38 / 20] || 14 || 7 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 10. [[Results of Bessel Functions|BS]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 653 | |||
|| 143 || 392 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 486 | |||
|| 80 || 20.4% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 209 | |||
|| 115 || 23.7% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 371 | |||
|| 86 || 41.1% || 59 || [ 41 / 18] || 52 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 12 | |||
|| 90 || 24.2% || 151 || [ 57 / 94] || 92 || 18 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 11. [[Results of Struve and Related Functions|ST]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 124 | |||
|| 48 || 121 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 112 | |||
|| 39 || 32.2% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 73 | |||
|| 36 || 32.1% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 76 | |||
|| 25 || 34.2% || 40 || [ 14 / 26] || 3 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 5 | |||
|| 21 || 27.6% || 33 || [ 8 / 25] || 10 || 11 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 12. [[Results of Parabolic Cylinder Functions|PC]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 106 | |||
|| 33 || 79 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 90 | |||
|| 25 || 31.6% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 50 | |||
|| 18 || 20.0% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 72 | |||
|| 15 || 30.0% || 24 || [ 15 / 9] || 11 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 0 | |||
|| 13 || 18.0% || 43 || [ 15 / 28] || 12 || 3 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 13. [[Results of Confluent Hypergeometric Functions|CH]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 260 | |||
|| 126 || 252 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 254 | |||
|| 75 || 29.8% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 143 | |||
|| 69 || 27.2% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 185 | |||
|| 14 || 9.8% || 90 || [ 55 / 35] || 37 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 2 | |||
|| 23 || 12.4% || 95 || [ 59 / 36] || 45 || 21 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 14. [[Results of Legendre and Related Functions|LE]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 238 | |||
|| 166 || 230 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 229 | |||
|| 30 || 13.0% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 163 | |||
|| 30 || 13.1% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 199 | |||
|| 40 || 24.5% || 93 || [ 57 / 36] || 18 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 12 | |||
|| 59 || 29.6% || 92 || [ 54 / 38] || 41 || 5 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 15. [[Results of Hypergeometric Function|HY]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 206 | |||
|| 148 || 198 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 197 | |||
|| 46 || 23.2% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 115 | |||
|| 53 || 26.9% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 144 | |||
|| 17 || 14.8% || 52 || [ 34 / 18] || 23 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 23 | |||
|| 23 || 16.0% || 77 || [ 52 / 25] || 29 || 6 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 16. [[Results of Generalized Hypergeometric Functions and Meijer G-Function|GH]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 53 | |||
|| 20 || 23 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 25 | |||
|| 3 || 13.0% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 16 | |||
|| 2 || 8.0% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 23 | |||
|| 1 || 6.2% || 9 || [ 8 / 1] || 6 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 0 | |||
|| 1 || 4.3% || 10 || [ 7 / 3] || 9 || 2 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 17. [[Results of q-Hypergeometric and Related Functions|QH]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 175 | |||
|| 1 || 53 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 124 | |||
|| 23 || 43.4% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 24 | |||
|| 6 || 4.8% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 118 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% || 0 || [ 0 / 0] || 1 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 23 | |||
|| 13 || 11.0% || 57 || [ 52 / 5] || 39 || 5 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 18. [[Results of Orthogonal Polynomials|OP]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 468 | |||
|| 132 || 235 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 288 | |||
|| 65 || 27.6% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 148 | |||
|| 101 || 35.1% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 185 | |||
|| 67 || 45.3% || 50 || [ 32 / 18] || 14 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 17 | |||
|| 45 || 24.3% || 68 || [ 31 / 37] || 52 || 12 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 19. [[Results of Elliptic Integrals|EL]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 516 | |||
|| 103 || 252 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 416 | |||
|| 39 || 15.5% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 192 | |||
|| 51 || 12.2% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 365 | |||
|| 18 || 9.4% || 123 || [ 44 / 79] || 34 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 17 | |||
|| 18 || 4.9% || 264 || [ 49 / 215] || 61 || 15 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 20. [[Results of Theta Functions|TH]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 128 | |||
|| 52 || 98 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 98 | |||
|| 10 || 10.2% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 68 | |||
|| 1 || 1.0% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 97 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% || 32 || [ 17 / 15] || 20 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 16 | |||
|| 33 || 34.0% || 40 || [ 25 / 15] || 24 || 0 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 21. [[Results of Multidimensional Theta Functions|MT]] | |||
|style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 32 | |||
|| 0 || 0 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 0 | |||
|| - || - | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | - | |||
|| - || - | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | - | |||
|| - || - || - || - || - | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | - | |||
|| - || - || - || - || - || - | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 22. [[Results of Jacobian Elliptic Functions|JA]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 264 | |||
|| 115 || 232 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 238 | |||
|| 46 || 19.8% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 176 | |||
|| 30 || 12.6% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 206 | |||
|| 20 || 11.4% || 116 || [ 25 / 91] || 36 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 4 | |||
|| 22 || 10.7% || 131 || [ 39 / 92] || 51 || 0 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 23. [[Results of Weierstrass Elliptic and Modular Functions|WE]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 164 | |||
|| 7 || 19 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 34 | |||
|| 1 || 5.3% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 16 | |||
|| 4 || 11.8% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 30 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% || 14 || [ 2 / 12] || 1 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 1 | |||
|| 2 || 6.7% || 23 || [ 9 / 14] || 2 || 3 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 24. [[Results of Bernoulli and Euler Polynomials|BP]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 175 | |||
|| 31 || 117 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 148 | |||
|| 15 || 12.8% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 101 | |||
|| 23 || 15.5% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 125 | |||
|| 67 || 66.3% || 32 || [ 19 / 13] || 1 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 1 | |||
|| 78 || 62.4% || 33 || [ 22 / 11] || 14 || 0 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 25. [[Results of Zeta and Related Functions|ZE]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 154 | |||
|| 28 || 124 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 120 | |||
|| 19 || 15.3% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 90 | |||
|| 48 || 40.0% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 72 | |||
|| 43 || 47.8% || 29 || [ 18 / 11] || 10 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 8 | |||
|| 22 || 30.5% || 22 || [ 6 / 16] || 22 || 3 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 26. [[Results of Combinatorial Analysis|CM]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 136 | |||
|| 31 || 78 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 87 | |||
|| 20 || 25.6% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 50 | |||
|| 19 || 21.8% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 68 | |||
|| 30 || 60.0% || 11 || [ 8 / 3] || 2 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 7 | |||
|| 44 || 64.7% || 18 || [ 10 / 8] || 5 || 1 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 27. [[Results of Functions of Number Theory|NT]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 79 | |||
|| 5 || 26 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 15 | |||
|| 3 || 11.5% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 17 | |||
|| 6 || 40.0% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 9 | |||
|| 2 || 11.8% || 6 || [ 3 / 3] || 0 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 8 | |||
|| 3 || 33.3% || 6 || [ 3 / 3] || 0 || 0 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 28. [[Results of Mathieu Functions and Hill’s Equation|MA]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 267 | |||
|| 52 || 97 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 110 | |||
|| 7 || 7.2% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 80 | |||
|| 7 || 6.4% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 103 | |||
|| 6 || 7.5% || 32 || [ 12 / 20] || 26 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 15 | |||
|| 3 || 2.9% || 48 || [ 13 / 35] || 33 || 17 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 29. [[Results of Lamé Functions|LA]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 111 | |||
|| 11 || 23 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 22 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 21 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 22 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% || 19 || [ 2 / 17] || 0 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 2 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% || 21 || [ 1 / 20] || 0 || 1 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 30. [[Results of Spheroidal Wave Functions|SW]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 71 | |||
|| 14 || 19 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 26 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 18 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 26 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% || 18 || [ 5 / 13] || 0 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 0 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% || 19 || [ 2 / 17] || 5 || 1 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 31. [[Results of Heun Functions|HE]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 35 | |||
|| 29 || 22 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 15 | |||
|| 5 || 22.7% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 13 | |||
|| 2 || 13.3% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 13 | |||
|| 2 || 15.4% || 10 || [ 0 / 10] || 0 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 1 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% || 8 || [ 0 / 8] || 5 || 0 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 32. [[Results of Painlevé Transcendents|PT]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 67 | |||
|| 43 || 57 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 57 | |||
|| 3 || 5.3% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 51 | |||
|| 3 || 5.3% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 54 | |||
|| 1 || 2.0% || 44 || [ 7 / 37] || 4 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 2 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% || 41 || [ 2 / 39] || 8 || 5 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 33. [[Results of Coulomb Functions|CW]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 108 | |||
|| 21 || 14 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 11 | |||
|| 1 || 7.1% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 13 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 11 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% || 5 || [ 2 / 3] || 0 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 8 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% || 11 || [ 2 / 9] || 0 || 0 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 34. [[Results of 3j,6j,9j Symbols|TJ]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 57 | |||
|| 0 || 1 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 37 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 1 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 37 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% || 1 || [ 0 / 1] || 0 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 0 | |||
|| 14 || 37.8% || 10 || [ 5 / 5] || 13 || 0 | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 35. [[Results of Functions of Matrix Argument|FM]] | |||
|style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 46 | |||
|| 0 || 0 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 0 | |||
|| - || - | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | - | |||
|| - || - | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | - | |||
|| - || - || - || - || - | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | - | |||
|| - || - || - || - || - || - | |||
|- | |||
! scope="row" style="text-align: left; border-right: solid 1px #000"| 36. [[Results of Integrals with Coalescing Saddles|IC]] | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 106 | |||
|| 12 || 24 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 24 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 19 | |||
|| 0 || 0.0% | |||
| style="border-right: solid 1px #000;" | 24 | |||
|| 3 || 15.8% || 12 || [ 1 / 11] || 3 | |||
| style="border-right: solid 2px #aaa;" | 1 | |||
|| 3 || 12.5% || 13 || [ 1 / 12] || 1 || 6 | |||
|- | |||
! <math>\sum</math> || 6623 || 2067 || 4114 || 4713 || 1084 || 26.3% || 2618 || 1235 || 26.2% || 3474 || 698 || 26.7% || 1357 || [607 / 750] || 329 || 226 || 784 || 22.6% || 1784 || [687 / 1097] || 655 || 180 | |||
|- | |||
|} | |||
=References= |
Latest revision as of 12:55, 28 November 2023
This wiki provides an overview of LaCASt, our LaTeX to Computer Algebra Systems (CAS) Translator, and its translations of the Digital Library of Mathematical Functions (DLMF). Specifically, we provide access to the translations for Maple and Mathematica. Additionally, each translation was verified with symbolic and numeric evaluation techniques. In the following, we present the results of our translations and evaluations.
For legal inquiries, use the methods described at https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/.
Bug Reports
You can find a PDF with commands that illustrate the encountered errors in Mathematica here: File:Mathematica Bugs Overview.pdf
We provide the same file in the Wolfram system notebook format (NB) here: File:Mathematica Bugs Notebook File.nb
DLMF Translations and Results
This section explains the data you can access. Below, you will find a large table that shows the overall results of translations, symbolic and numeric verifications, as well as a number of errors and aborted calculations for each DLMF chapter. Before you move on to investigating the results, please have a look at how to read the data first.
How to read the data?
The data on this website can be considered as an extension of the DLMF but not a copy. Some labeled equations in the DLMF do not appear in this data because they were skipped or caused translation errors in both systems (Maple and Mathematica). In addition, the result tables on this website do not provide context! For checking the context, every equation in our dataset is linked directly to the equation in the DLMF. You can access the original DLMF equation by clicking on the label in the most-left column in the result tables.
You can access the results by clicking on a particular chapter below. This will load a page showing links to each section. Red links indicate that this section is empty, i.e., no results are available for that section. Clicking on a blue-inked link will load the result table for that section. Below you see an example of such a table with just two equations from different chapters. As you can see, the first entry 4.12.E1 is grayed out. This happens when the entry was skipped due to missing semantic macros in the source of the test case (flagged as Skipped - no semantic math
). You can see the actual semantic LaTeX source of every test case below the equation. Since most of these cases are not translated properly by LCT, we skipped them directly, i.e., they were not further processed for symbolic or numeric evaluations. In fact, those cases have not even been translated into our pipeline. However, we added the translations just for our result tables because they may provide further interesting insights into the translation process.
The most-right columns in the table show the numeric evaluation results. If an equation was not numerically verified, it shows Failed [x/y]
where Failed to parse (LaTeXML (experimental; uses MathML): Invalid response ("") from server "http://latexml:8080/convert/":): {\displaystyle x}
is the number of failed calculations and Failed to parse (LaTeXML (experimental; uses MathML): Invalid response ("") from server "http://latexml:8080/convert/":): {\displaystyle y}
is the number of all test calculations for this test case. As you can see in the second entry below 11.5.E2, 15 test calculations failed out of 25, so 10 were successful. When you click on the little Expand
, we show the first couple of results for the failed test cases. Since the tables are already very large, we cannot show all failed test calculations.
Clicking on expand
for the second entry in our example table below, we see the test result and the test values that produced this result. As explained in the paper, the calculation was simply performed on the difference of the left- and right-hand sides of the equation LHS - RHS
. Further explanations on why this test failed can be found in the paper.
Result: Complex[0.9495382353861556, -0.46093572348323536]
Test Values: {Rule[z, Power[E, Times[Complex[0, Rational[1, 6]], Pi]]], Rule[ν, 1.5]}
Result: Complex[0.7706973036767981, -0.20650772012904173]
Test Values: {Rule[z, Power[E, Times[Complex[0, Rational[1, 6]], Pi]]], Rule[ν, 0.5]}
DLMF | Formula | Constraints | Maple | Mathematica | Symbolic Maple |
Symbolic Mathematica |
Numeric Maple |
Numeric Mathematica |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
4.12.E1 | Failed to parse (LaTeXML (experimental; uses MathML): Invalid response ("") from server "http://latexml:8080/convert/":): {\displaystyle \phi(x+1) = e^{\phi(x)}}
\phi(x+1) = e^{\phi(x)} |
Failed to parse (LaTeXML (experimental; uses MathML): Invalid response ("") from server "http://latexml:8080/convert/":): {\displaystyle -1 < x, x < \infty} | phi(x + 1) = exp(phi(x)) |
\[Phi][x + 1] == Exp[\[Phi][x]] |
Skipped - no semantic math | Skipped - no semantic math | - | - |
11.5.E2 | Failed to parse (LaTeXML (experimental; uses MathML): Invalid response ("") from server "http://latexml:8080/convert/":): {\displaystyle \StruveK{\nu}@{z} = \frac{2(\tfrac{1}{2}z)^{\nu}}{\sqrt{\pi}\EulerGamma@{\nu+\tfrac{1}{2}}}\int_{0}^{\infty}e^{-zt}(1+t^{2})^{\nu-\frac{1}{2}}\diff{t}}
\StruveK{\nu}@{z} = \frac{2(\tfrac{1}{2}z)^{\nu}}{\sqrt{\pi}\EulerGamma@{\nu+\tfrac{1}{2}}}\int_{0}^{\infty}e^{-zt}(1+t^{2})^{\nu-\frac{1}{2}}\diff{t} |
Failed to parse (LaTeXML (experimental; uses MathML): Invalid response ("") from server "http://latexml:8080/convert/":): {\displaystyle \realpart@@{z} > 0, \realpart@@{(\nu+\tfrac{1}{2})} > 0, \realpart@@{(\nu+k+1)} > 0, \realpart@@{((-\nu)+k+1)} > 0, \realpart@@{(n+\nu+\tfrac{3}{2})} > 0} | StruveH(nu, z) - BesselY(nu, z) = (2*((1)/(2)*z)^(nu))/(sqrt(Pi)*GAMMA(nu +(1)/(2)))*int(exp(- z*t)*(1 + (t)^(2))^(nu -(1)/(2)), t = 0..infinity)
|
StruveH[\[Nu], z] - BesselY[\[Nu], z] == Divide[2*(Divide[1,2]*z)^\[Nu],Sqrt[Pi]*Gamma[\[Nu]+Divide[1,2]]]*Integrate[Exp[- z*t]*(1 + (t)^(2))^(\[Nu]-Divide[1,2]), {t, 0, Infinity}, GenerateConditions->None]
|
Successful | Successful | - | Failed [15 / 25]
Result: Complex[0.9495382353861556, -0.46093572348323536]
Test Values: {Rule[z, Power[E, Times[Complex[0, Rational[1, 6]], Pi]]], Rule[ν, 1.5]}
Result: Complex[0.7706973036767981, -0.20650772012904173]
Test Values: {Rule[z, Power[E, Times[Complex[0, Rational[1, 6]], Pi]]], Rule[ν, 0.5]}
... skip entries to safe data |
As a summary, here is an explanation for every column of the result tables.
- DLMF
- Contains the equation label as a link to the actual equation in the DLMF. Click on the label if you need to check the context of a formula in the DLMF.
- Formula
- Contains the rendered formula and the actual semantic LaTeX source (sometimes also referred to as content-tex). More information about the semantic (or content) LaTeX can be found in [1]
- Constraints
- This shows the constraints that LCT has generated by analyzing the definitions of the functions that are included in the equation. This also includes the constraints that are directly attached to a test case. For example, 11.5.E2 only has the constraint Failed to parse (LaTeXML (experimental; uses MathML): Invalid response ("") from server "http://latexml:8080/convert/":): {\displaystyle \realpart@@{z} > 0} . LCT followed the definitions of the involved functions and identified several more constraints for this test case. A detailed explanation of this process was given in the paper. Note, however, that this list of constraints does not contain the manually defined global constraints that we applied for all test cases (as shown in Table 3 in the paper). This way, the result tables only show what LCT generated and applied for the numeric evaluations.
- Maple
- The translation to Maple
- Mathematica
- The translation to Mathematica
- Symbolic (Maple / Mathematica)
- The result of the symbolic evaluation. If this was skipped, no calculations have been performed on the test case.
- Numeric (Maple / Mathematica)
- The result of the numeric evaluation as explained above and in the paper.
Links to the data
In the following, we present an overview of the translations of the DLMF equations to the CAS Maple and Mathematica.
DLMF | Formula | Translations Maple |
Translations Mathematica |
Symbolic Evaluation Maple |
Symbolic Evaluation Mathematica |
Numeric Evaluation Maple |
Numeric Evaluation Mathematica |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DLMF | 6,545 | 4,114 (62.9%) | 4,713 (72.0%) | 1,084 (26.3%) | 1,235 (26.2%) | 698 (26.7%) | 784 (22.6%) |
The following links provide access to all results for each DLMF chapter. This will show the sections in each chapter. Please notice that many sections in a chapter might be empty (indicated by a red link color instead of a blue link). This happens when all formulae in a section have been skipped or the case analyzer was not able to parse the expression properly. In some cases, the section simply did not contain any formula.
- Algebraic and Analytic Methods
- Asymptotic Approximations
- Numerical Methods
- Elementary Functions
- Gamma Function
- Exponential, Logarithmic, Sine, and Cosine Integrals
- Error Functions, Dawson’s and Fresnel Integrals
- Incomplete Gamma and Related Functions
- Airy and Related Functions
- Bessel Functions
- Struve and Related Functions
- Parabolic Cylinder Functions
- Confluent Hypergeometric Functions
- Legendre and Related Functions
- Hypergeometric Function
- Generalized Hypergeometric Functions and Meijer G-Function
- q-Hypergeometric and Related Functions
- Orthogonal Polynomials
- Elliptic Integrals
- Theta Functions
- Multidimensional Theta Functions
- Jacobian Elliptic Functions
- Weierstrass Elliptic and Modular Functions
- Bernoulli and Euler Polynomials
- Zeta and Related Functions
- Combinatorial Analysis
- Functions of Number Theory
- Mathieu Functions and Hill’s Equation
- Lamé Functions
- Spheroidal Wave Functions
- Heun Functions
- Painlevé Transcendents
- Coulomb Functions
- 3j,6j,9j Symbols
- Functions of Matrix Argument
- Integrals with Coalescing Saddles
Examples
To provide you a starting point to investigate the data above, we suggest Hypergeometric Function - 15.4 Special Cases. For example, 15.4.E28
- Failed to parse (LaTeXML (experimental; uses MathML): Invalid response ("") from server "http://latexml:8080/convert/":): {\displaystyle \hyperF@{a}{b}{\tfrac{1}{2}a+\tfrac{1}{2}b+\tfrac{1}{2}}{\tfrac{1}{2}} = \sqrt{\pi}\frac{\EulerGamma@{\tfrac{1}{2}a+\tfrac{1}{2}b+\tfrac{1}{2}}}{\EulerGamma@{\tfrac{1}{2}a+\tfrac{1}{2}}\EulerGamma@{\tfrac{1}{2}b+\tfrac{1}{2}}}}
was successfully translated to Maple and Mathematica and verified symbolically and numerically in both systems despite the complexity of such a test case.
Maple | Mathematica |
---|---|
hypergeom([a, b], [(1)/(2)*a +(1)/(2)*b +(1)/(2)], (1)/(2)) = sqrt(Pi)*(GAMMA((1)/(2)*a +(1)/(2)*b +(1)/(2)))/(GAMMA((1)/(2)*a +(1)/(2))*GAMMA((1)/(2)*b +(1)/(2)))
|
Hypergeometric2F1[a, b, Divide[1,2]*a +Divide[1,2]*b +Divide[1,2], Divide[1,2]] == Sqrt[Pi]*Divide[Gamma[Divide[1,2]*a +Divide[1,2]*b +Divide[1,2]],Gamma[Divide[1,2]*a +Divide[1,2]]*Gamma[Divide[1,2]*b +Divide[1,2]]]
|
Another interesting section might be Combinatorial Analysis - 26.3 Lattice Paths: Binomial Coefficients. All expressions are relatively straight-forward. Nonetheless, 23.3.E8
- Failed to parse (LaTeXML (experimental; uses MathML): Invalid response ("") from server "http://latexml:8080/convert/":): {\displaystyle \binom{m}{n} = \sum_{k=0}^{n}\binom{m-n-1+k}{k}}
failed numerically. This test case failed because Mathematica simplified the right-hand side directly to Failed to parse (LaTeXML (experimental; uses MathML): Invalid response ("") from server "http://latexml:8080/convert/":): {\displaystyle \frac{(1+n) {m \choose n+1}}{m-n}} which would result in a division by zero for Failed to parse (LaTeXML (experimental; uses MathML): Invalid response ("") from server "http://latexml:8080/convert/":): {\displaystyle m = n} . Indeed, our result table show that the test evaluation failed for Failed to parse (LaTeXML (experimental; uses MathML): Invalid response ("") from server "http://latexml:8080/convert/":): {\displaystyle m=n=1} and Failed to parse (LaTeXML (experimental; uses MathML): Invalid response ("") from server "http://latexml:8080/convert/":): {\displaystyle m=n=2} (the last case Failed to parse (LaTeXML (experimental; uses MathML): Invalid response ("") from server "http://latexml:8080/convert/":): {\displaystyle m=n=3} was omitted because we only show the first two failed calculations to reduce the size of the result tables). This simple example shows the challenge of interpreting the data and working with computer algebra systems.
Translations and Evaluations Overview Table
Meaning | |
---|---|
2C | Chapter Code |
S | Successful |
% | Percentage |
F | Fail |
P/T | Partially / Totally Failed |
A | Aborted |
E | Errors |
Base | The baseline performance of the translator |
Maple | The CAS Maple 2020 |
Mathematica | The CAS Mathematica |
Symbolic | Numeric | |||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Formulae | Translations | Maple | Mathematica | Maple | Mathematica | |||||||||||||||||
2C | Total | Base | Maple | Math | S | % | F | S | % | F | S | % | F | [P/T] | A | E | S | % | F | [P/T] | A | E |
1. AL | 227 | 60 | 102 | 103 | 36 | 35.3% | 60 | 34 | 33.0% | 69 | 14 | 23.3% | 35 | [ 12 / 23] | 7 | 4 | 14 | 20.3% | 40 | [ 9 / 31] | 11 | 4 |
2. AS | 136 | 33 | 65 | 65 | 6 | 9.2% | 47 | 6 | 9.2% | 59 | 7 | 14.9% | 33 | [ 5 / 28] | 1 | 5 | 4 | 6.8% | 38 | [ 6 / 32] | 7 | 9 |
3. NM | 53 | 36 | 40 | 40 | 6 | 15.0% | 31 | 5 | 12.5% | 35 | 1 | 3.2% | 27 | [ 9 / 18] | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0.0% | 29 | [ 8 / 21] | 6 | 0 |
4. EF | 569 | 353 | 494 | 564 | 270 | 54.7% | 221 | 304 | 53.9% | 260 | 88 | 39.8% | 126 | [ 64 / 62] | 0 | 6 | 110 | 42.3% | 146 | [ 55 / 91] | 2 | 0 |
5. GA | 144 | 38 | 130 | 139 | 41 | 31.5% | 76 | 65 | 46.8% | 74 | 39 | 51.3% | 25 | [ 12 / 13] | 4 | 8 | 30 | 40.5% | 20 | [ 9 / 11] | 13 | 9 |
6. EX | 107 | 21 | 56 | 77 | 13 | 23.2% | 43 | 18 | 23.4% | 59 | 10 | 23.2% | 31 | [ 13 / 18] | 0 | 2 | 23 | 39.0% | 32 | [ 6 / 26] | 4 | 0 |
7. ER | 149 | 35 | 101 | 120 | 52 | 51.5% | 47 | 45 | 37.5% | 75 | 21 | 44.7% | 23 | [ 10 / 13] | 2 | 1 | 21 | 28.0% | 43 | [ 13 / 30] | 9 | 1 |
8. IG | 204 | 84 | 160 | 163 | 51 | 31.9% | 102 | 65 | 39.9% | 98 | 27 | 26.5% | 61 | [ 20 / 41] | 9 | 5 | 22 | 22.4% | 44 | [ 19 / 25] | 16 | 15 |
9. AI | 235 | 36 | 180 | 179 | 54 | 30.0% | 124 | 69 | 38.5% | 110 | 34 | 27.4% | 75 | [ 41 / 34] | 4 | 8 | 30 | 27.3% | 58 | [ 38 / 20] | 14 | 7 |
10. BS | 653 | 143 | 392 | 486 | 80 | 20.4% | 209 | 115 | 23.7% | 371 | 86 | 41.1% | 59 | [ 41 / 18] | 52 | 12 | 90 | 24.2% | 151 | [ 57 / 94] | 92 | 18 |
11. ST | 124 | 48 | 121 | 112 | 39 | 32.2% | 73 | 36 | 32.1% | 76 | 25 | 34.2% | 40 | [ 14 / 26] | 3 | 5 | 21 | 27.6% | 33 | [ 8 / 25] | 10 | 11 |
12. PC | 106 | 33 | 79 | 90 | 25 | 31.6% | 50 | 18 | 20.0% | 72 | 15 | 30.0% | 24 | [ 15 / 9] | 11 | 0 | 13 | 18.0% | 43 | [ 15 / 28] | 12 | 3 |
13. CH | 260 | 126 | 252 | 254 | 75 | 29.8% | 143 | 69 | 27.2% | 185 | 14 | 9.8% | 90 | [ 55 / 35] | 37 | 2 | 23 | 12.4% | 95 | [ 59 / 36] | 45 | 21 |
14. LE | 238 | 166 | 230 | 229 | 30 | 13.0% | 163 | 30 | 13.1% | 199 | 40 | 24.5% | 93 | [ 57 / 36] | 18 | 12 | 59 | 29.6% | 92 | [ 54 / 38] | 41 | 5 |
15. HY | 206 | 148 | 198 | 197 | 46 | 23.2% | 115 | 53 | 26.9% | 144 | 17 | 14.8% | 52 | [ 34 / 18] | 23 | 23 | 23 | 16.0% | 77 | [ 52 / 25] | 29 | 6 |
16. GH | 53 | 20 | 23 | 25 | 3 | 13.0% | 16 | 2 | 8.0% | 23 | 1 | 6.2% | 9 | [ 8 / 1] | 6 | 0 | 1 | 4.3% | 10 | [ 7 / 3] | 9 | 2 |
17. QH | 175 | 1 | 53 | 124 | 23 | 43.4% | 24 | 6 | 4.8% | 118 | 0 | 0.0% | 0 | [ 0 / 0] | 1 | 23 | 13 | 11.0% | 57 | [ 52 / 5] | 39 | 5 |
18. OP | 468 | 132 | 235 | 288 | 65 | 27.6% | 148 | 101 | 35.1% | 185 | 67 | 45.3% | 50 | [ 32 / 18] | 14 | 17 | 45 | 24.3% | 68 | [ 31 / 37] | 52 | 12 |
19. EL | 516 | 103 | 252 | 416 | 39 | 15.5% | 192 | 51 | 12.2% | 365 | 18 | 9.4% | 123 | [ 44 / 79] | 34 | 17 | 18 | 4.9% | 264 | [ 49 / 215] | 61 | 15 |
20. TH | 128 | 52 | 98 | 98 | 10 | 10.2% | 68 | 1 | 1.0% | 97 | 0 | 0.0% | 32 | [ 17 / 15] | 20 | 16 | 33 | 34.0% | 40 | [ 25 / 15] | 24 | 0 |
21. MT | 32 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
22. JA | 264 | 115 | 232 | 238 | 46 | 19.8% | 176 | 30 | 12.6% | 206 | 20 | 11.4% | 116 | [ 25 / 91] | 36 | 4 | 22 | 10.7% | 131 | [ 39 / 92] | 51 | 0 |
23. WE | 164 | 7 | 19 | 34 | 1 | 5.3% | 16 | 4 | 11.8% | 30 | 0 | 0.0% | 14 | [ 2 / 12] | 1 | 1 | 2 | 6.7% | 23 | [ 9 / 14] | 2 | 3 |
24. BP | 175 | 31 | 117 | 148 | 15 | 12.8% | 101 | 23 | 15.5% | 125 | 67 | 66.3% | 32 | [ 19 / 13] | 1 | 1 | 78 | 62.4% | 33 | [ 22 / 11] | 14 | 0 |
25. ZE | 154 | 28 | 124 | 120 | 19 | 15.3% | 90 | 48 | 40.0% | 72 | 43 | 47.8% | 29 | [ 18 / 11] | 10 | 8 | 22 | 30.5% | 22 | [ 6 / 16] | 22 | 3 |
26. CM | 136 | 31 | 78 | 87 | 20 | 25.6% | 50 | 19 | 21.8% | 68 | 30 | 60.0% | 11 | [ 8 / 3] | 2 | 7 | 44 | 64.7% | 18 | [ 10 / 8] | 5 | 1 |
27. NT | 79 | 5 | 26 | 15 | 3 | 11.5% | 17 | 6 | 40.0% | 9 | 2 | 11.8% | 6 | [ 3 / 3] | 0 | 8 | 3 | 33.3% | 6 | [ 3 / 3] | 0 | 0 |
28. MA | 267 | 52 | 97 | 110 | 7 | 7.2% | 80 | 7 | 6.4% | 103 | 6 | 7.5% | 32 | [ 12 / 20] | 26 | 15 | 3 | 2.9% | 48 | [ 13 / 35] | 33 | 17 |
29. LA | 111 | 11 | 23 | 22 | 0 | 0.0% | 21 | 0 | 0.0% | 22 | 0 | 0.0% | 19 | [ 2 / 17] | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0.0% | 21 | [ 1 / 20] | 0 | 1 |
30. SW | 71 | 14 | 19 | 26 | 0 | 0.0% | 18 | 0 | 0.0% | 26 | 0 | 0.0% | 18 | [ 5 / 13] | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0% | 19 | [ 2 / 17] | 5 | 1 |
31. HE | 35 | 29 | 22 | 15 | 5 | 22.7% | 13 | 2 | 13.3% | 13 | 2 | 15.4% | 10 | [ 0 / 10] | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.0% | 8 | [ 0 / 8] | 5 | 0 |
32. PT | 67 | 43 | 57 | 57 | 3 | 5.3% | 51 | 3 | 5.3% | 54 | 1 | 2.0% | 44 | [ 7 / 37] | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0.0% | 41 | [ 2 / 39] | 8 | 5 |
33. CW | 108 | 21 | 14 | 11 | 1 | 7.1% | 13 | 0 | 0.0% | 11 | 0 | 0.0% | 5 | [ 2 / 3] | 0 | 8 | 0 | 0.0% | 11 | [ 2 / 9] | 0 | 0 |
34. TJ | 57 | 0 | 1 | 37 | 0 | 0.0% | 1 | 0 | 0.0% | 37 | 0 | 0.0% | 1 | [ 0 / 1] | 0 | 0 | 14 | 37.8% | 10 | [ 5 / 5] | 13 | 0 |
35. FM | 46 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
36. IC | 106 | 12 | 24 | 24 | 0 | 0.0% | 19 | 0 | 0.0% | 24 | 3 | 15.8% | 12 | [ 1 / 11] | 3 | 1 | 3 | 12.5% | 13 | [ 1 / 12] | 1 | 6 |
Failed to parse (LaTeXML (experimental; uses MathML): Invalid response ("") from server "http://latexml:8080/convert/":): {\displaystyle \sum} | 6623 | 2067 | 4114 | 4713 | 1084 | 26.3% | 2618 | 1235 | 26.2% | 3474 | 698 | 26.7% | 1357 | [607 / 750] | 329 | 226 | 784 | 22.6% | 1784 | [687 / 1097] | 655 | 180 |
References
- ↑ Abdou Youssef and Bruce R. Miller, "A Contextual and Labeled Math-Dataset Derived from NIST's DLMF." In: Intelligent Computer Mathematics (CICM) 2020: 324-330. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-53518-6_25