@jaytreiman wrote:

Why does this example do any numerical integration?

Using capital I guarantees that it will use numeric integration, even if it knows the antiderivative. You can verify that it is using numeric integration by setting infolevel[evalf]:= 1 (or higher).

You are still using a function that has an antiderivative that is known to Maple.

It is not known to my version of Maple (17.01). Notice the double exponential: exp(-exp(x^2)). If you can get Maple to produce an antiderivative for that, I'd like to see it.

Since Maple usually tries to evaluate the function to be plotted before any plotting is done, I do not see the difference.

Under the normal evaluation rules, capital I Int is just a dummy function---just a name. It remains unevaluated. You can verify this by entering eval(Int) and seeing that there is no procedure or module by that name. It is only when evalf or value is applied to it that anything happens.

Your method works without the Int.  You can use int instead.

That is true. But with int it will waste time trying to find an antiderivative. It is not much time in this particular case, but could be a substantial amount of time for other integrands. If you know that you want numeric integration, you should use Int from the start. There are also cases where int won't work---it will cause an error---such as when the integrand involves a call to fsolve, a common situation.

Running out of memory will often cause a stack limit error. This error is unrecoverable, so you lose the kernel. When running these big programs, it is useful to monitor your memory usage externally with a program like Windows Task Manager on Windows or "top" on Linux. When your memory usage is at about 95% of the available total, it is probably time to kill the program.

My guess is that the new machine has less memory available to you than the old machine. Is it shared with other users?

By not using simplify, you will also use much less memory.

Running out of memory will often cause a stack limit error. This error is unrecoverable, so you lose the kernel. When running these big programs, it is useful to monitor your memory usage externally with a program like Windows Task Manager on Windows or "top" on Linux. When your memory usage is at about 95% of the available total, it is probably time to kill the program.

My guess is that the new machine has less memory available to you than the old machine. Is it shared with other users?

By not using simplify, you will also use much less memory.

@Heeka It will work in Maple 16.

No, you do not ask too many questions. Your questions about Maple are always welcome here!

@Heeka It will work in Maple 16.

No, you do not ask too many questions. Your questions about Maple are always welcome here!

Jay,

MaplePrimes seems to reinterpret the plot commands when you upload a worksheet. For example, notice the inclusion of gridlines. To prevent this, export the plots and upload them separately. I usually export as PNG if I'm not happy with how MaplePrimes mangled my plot.

Jay,

MaplePrimes seems to reinterpret the plot commands when you upload a worksheet. For example, notice the inclusion of gridlines. To prevent this, export the plots and upload them separately. I usually export as PNG if I'm not happy with how MaplePrimes mangled my plot.

Georgios,

In your example, Maple is not doing any numeric integration. It is computing a single antiderivative, which it then plots. You were just lucky that the constant of integration was what you wanted.

Jay,

Your first example (in the Answer) is not numeric integration either. The quotes are making Maple compute the antiderivative separately for each point it plots.

Georgios,

In your example, Maple is not doing any numeric integration. It is computing a single antiderivative, which it then plots. You were just lucky that the constant of integration was what you wanted.

Jay,

Your first example (in the Answer) is not numeric integration either. The quotes are making Maple compute the antiderivative separately for each point it plots.

@Heeka The GraphTheory package that I have been using throughout your two most recent threads does not exist in Maple 11.

The only other techniques for enumerating the Eulerian circuits that I can think of would be ad hoc---they would only work for a very small graph like this. Without loss of generality, we can assume that all Eulerian circuits begin with edges CA and AT.

@Heeka The GraphTheory package that I have been using throughout your two most recent threads does not exist in Maple 11.

The only other techniques for enumerating the Eulerian circuits that I can think of would be ad hoc---they would only work for a very small graph like this. Without loss of generality, we can assume that all Eulerian circuits begin with edges CA and AT.

@Heeka Note that there is a one-to-one correspondence between the Eulerian circuits in the original graph and in my enlarged graph.

@Heeka Note that there is a one-to-one correspondence between the Eulerian circuits in the original graph and in my enlarged graph.

@Markiyan Hirnyk My first answer was to a question that you deleted---a question about the examples on the help page ?LinearAlgebra,Modular,LinearSolve . I have since posted an answer to your second question.

@Markiyan Hirnyk My first answer was to a question that you deleted---a question about the examples on the help page ?LinearAlgebra,Modular,LinearSolve . I have since posted an answer to your second question.