Opened 10 years ago
Closed 9 years ago
#11233 closed defect (fixed)
failing calculation of an integral
Reported by: | casamayou | Owned by: | burcin |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | sage-5.1 |
Component: | calculus | Keywords: | integrate |
Cc: | zimmerma | Merged in: | sage-5.1.beta0 |
Authors: | Michael Orlitzky | Reviewers: | Paul Zimmermann |
Report Upstream: | Fixed upstream, in a later stable release. | Work issues: | |
Branch: | Commit: | ||
Dependencies: | Stopgaps: |
Description
In the following calculation, Sage4.6.2 returns the opposite of the right result :
sage: var('a t') (a, t) sage: assume(a>0) sage: assume(x>0) sage: f = integrate(log(1+a/(x * t)^2), t, 1, oo) sage: f (sqrt(a)*x*log((x^2 + a)/x^2) - 2*a*arctan(sqrt(a)/x))/(sqrt(a)*x) sage: f.subs(x=1, a=7).n() -4.32025625668262
For information, Sage 4.6 gives the right result :
sage: var('a t') (a, t) sage: assume(a>0) sage: assume(x>0) sage: f = integrate(log(1+a/(x * t)^2), t, 1, oo) sage: f pi*sqrt(a)/x - (x*log((x2 + a)/x2) + 2*sqrt(a)*arctan(x/sqrt(a)))/x sage: f.subs(x=1, a=7).n() 4.32025625668262
For information, Maple9 gives this :
> assume(a>0): assume(x>0): > f := int(ln(1+a/(x * t)^2), t=1..infinity): > lprint(f); (2*ln(x)*x-2*a^(1/2)*arctan(x/a^(1/2))-ln(x^2+a)*x+a^(1/2)*Pi)/x > evalf(subs(x=1, a=7, f)); bytes used=4000512, alloc=3341724, time=0.13 4.320256257
Attachments (1)
Change History (16)
comment:1 Changed 10 years ago by
- Report Upstream changed from N/A to Not yet reported upstream; Will do shortly.
comment:2 Changed 10 years ago by
- Report Upstream changed from Not yet reported upstream; Will do shortly. to Reported upstream. Little or no feedback.
This is now this bug report at the Maxima tracker.
comment:3 Changed 10 years ago by
- Report Upstream changed from Reported upstream. Little or no feedback. to Fixed upstream, but not in a stable release.
Apparently this is fixed upstream now.
comment:4 Changed 9 years ago by
Checking against 5.0.beta9, this looks good:
sage: var('a t') (a, t) sage: assume(a>0) sage: assume(x>0) sage: f = integrate(log(1+a/(x * t)^2), t, 1, oo) sage: f (sqrt(a)*x*log((x^2 + a)/x^2) - 2*a*arctan(sqrt(a)/x))/(sqrt(a)*x) sage: f.subs(x=1, a=7).n() 4.32025625668262
comment:5 Changed 9 years ago by
- Report Upstream changed from Fixed upstream, but not in a stable release. to Fixed upstream, in a later stable release.
Okay, so then all we need is a doctest referring to this ticket.
comment:6 Changed 9 years ago by
- Status changed from new to needs_review
The scientific notation change in the abs_tol
above is unrelated, but I'm 99% sure I did that and it's a little embarrassing =)
comment:7 Changed 9 years ago by
- Reviewers set to Paul Zimmermann
- Status changed from needs_review to positive_review
I give a positive review. Thank you Michael!
Paul
comment:8 Changed 9 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-5.0 to sage-5.1
comment:9 Changed 9 years ago by
- Status changed from positive_review to needs_work
The patch needs to be rebased to sage-5.0.beta14:
applying sage-trac_11233.patch patching file sage/symbolic/integration/integral.py Hunk #1 FAILED at 580 1 out of 1 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file sage/symbolic/integration/integral.py.rej patch failed, unable to continue (try -v) patch failed, rejects left in working dir errors during apply, please fix and refresh sage-trac_11233.patch
comment:10 Changed 9 years ago by
Michael, please can you rebase your patch?
Paul
comment:11 Changed 9 years ago by
Sure, done.
comment:12 Changed 9 years ago by
- Status changed from needs_work to needs_review
comment:13 Changed 9 years ago by
- Status changed from needs_review to positive_review
I only checked that the rebased patch applies cleanly to sage 5.0.beta10, and that the integral returns the correct result, assuming the rest did not change.
Paul
comment:14 Changed 9 years ago by
oops, that should be "sage.5.0.beta14" above.
Paul
comment:15 Changed 9 years ago by
- Merged in set to sage-5.1.beta0
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from positive_review to closed
I can confirm this in Maxima 5.24.0:
Looks like a different branch of log is being used. Also for comparison, here is what GSL says:
We should file something with the Maxima tracker.