I guess I would approach this by using MapleTA range instead of messing with the Maple randomization seed:

$rA=range(1,100);
$rB=range(1,100);

$A=maple("randomize($rA):LinearAlgebra[RandomMatrix](2,2,generator=rand(-9..9))");
$B=maple("randomize($rB):LinearAlgebra[RandomMatrix](2,2,generator=rand(-9..9))");
$displayA=maple("printf(MathML:-ExportPresentation($A))");
$displayB=maple("printf(MathML:-ExportPresentation($B))");

There is ed.sty in CTAN that is for inserting editorial notes.

I bet you have the wrong ed.sty.

Look on the Maplesoft website for the one to author MapleTA questions.

It is surprising that Maple needs to be coaxed into finding the two solutions since it trivially reduces to  a simple quadratic equation. I expected your approach to readily give both solutions.

Here is the most direct workaround that I see:

replace solve({E1,E2}) with

subs(E2,E1);solve(%);

From here you can subsitute these two x-values into E2 to find the ordinates.

I stil like to use

with(student):

middlebox(x^2+1,x=0..2,10);

It' so easy and to the point. No baggage.

I know--it's deprecated. I can hear the howls and screams. For Halloween some year I plan to dress up as my favorite deprecated Maple command.
 

Replace the curly braces { } in P1 with parentheses (  ) and in the last line use fsolve instead of solve. You end up with

X4 := {beta = .5666679932, lambda = -1.518022637, p = 4.035629244}

This should work in older versions of Maple:

with(plottools):with(plots):

 eq:=A->z^3-z+A;

s:=A->evalf([solve(eq(A))]);

 frames:=seq(
                          complexplot(s(-2+4*i/20),
                            symbol=solidcircle,symbolsize=30,style=point),
                  i=0..20):

 display(frames,insequence=true);

Note: solidcircle is not solid if you use classic so use the standard interface.

Try

combinat[powerset](L);
 

Perhaps you are anticipating the result of

evalf(3/2);

I would hope that evalf(10.5) would not increase the implied precision of 10.5

Axel is right. You are not going to find a closed form expression for the expected value of f(t) in terms of mu and delta.

Using his J, however, you can plot the expected value as a function of mu and delta:

plot3d(eval(J,[mu=x,delta=y]),x=1..2,y=1..2,grid=[7,7]);

What do you would you do with a closed form expression, if you had it? Maybe you can do this anyway without the closed form expression.

Maybe you want something like this in place of your fourth line:

DG1:= subs([phi[1] = phi1(phi2,phi3), phi[2] = phi2(phi1,phi3), phi[3] = phi3(phi1,phi2), v[1] = v1, v[2] = v2, v[3] = v3], DG);

This treats phi1 as a function of phi2 and phi3, etc.

In your section "Summary of eigenvalues" you need :=  (assignment) and not just = (equality).

I copied the error message in your file (formatted as "document mode with 2D input") into another file formatted as "worksheet with 1D input". Then I replaced implied multiplications with * and (e) with exp. Then your equations parsed.

My advice is this: if you want to get anything meaningful done with Maple, use worksheet mode with 1D input.  It's just a really bad idea to use either document mode or 2D input.

View 2448_elango8Response.mw on MapleNet or Download 2448_elango8Response.mw
View file details

This seems to work OK:

student[changevar](sqrt(x-y)=b,f3);

Just forget about using VectorCalculus package and solve it directly:

pdsolve({diff(F(x,y),x)=Fx(x,y,u),diff(F(x,y),y)=Fy(x,y,u)});
 

You could try

a:=convert(A,set);

b:=convert(B,set);

and then compare the sets.

For example:

is (a=b);

I don't know how effective this is.