However, the infinite class would have allowed integration from [-Inf,
C!=0].
Can you manage that with Gauss Hermite?
I don't think so (non-authoritative answer).
that the answer is 1).]
Just Posted MATH-1015 which describes how you'd do this with your
integration methods.
Cheers,
Ajo.
On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 07:50:25 -0700, Ajo Fod wrote:
It would be nice to know whether the Gauss-Hermite implementation
recently
added proves useful for that purpose; and if so, whether it could be
added
as a non-trivial example in the user guide.
I'll check it out when I get back to it.
You mean just move the Infinite.class to the test section?
Sure ... go ahead.
-Ajo
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 5:33 AM, Gilles gil...@harfang.homelinux.orgwrote:
On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 07:50:25 -0700, Ajo Fod wrote:
It would be nice to know whether the Gauss-Hermite implementation recently
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:03:15 -0700, Ajo Fod wrote:
So, given this development, I'm not particularly motivated to
develop AQ
further.
So, all the fuss just to use a numerical method for computing a
value
known in advance?
The fuss was about the ability to compute the partition function
It would be nice to know whether the Gauss-Hermite implementation recently
added proves useful for that purpose; and if so, whether it could be added
as a non-trivial example in the user guide.
I'll check it out when I get back to it.
How do you propose to do the test without a change of
So, given this development, I'm not particularly motivated to develop AQ
further.
So, all the fuss just to use a numerical method for computing a value
known in advance?
The fuss was about the ability to compute the partition function for the
exponential family. It has closed form values
On Sun, 21 Jul 2013 17:41:16 -0700, Ajo Fod wrote:
Based on the tests you posted it seems like Gauss-Hermite fills the
capability CM was missing of doing one class of improper integrals.
However, the infinite class would have allowed integration from
[-Inf,
C!=0].
Can you manage that with
The patches for Math-994 have been reworked ... slightly better design.
Here is some numerical analysis on the issue:
Laguerre is defined only in [0,+ve Inf]
Hermite is defined in [-Inf,+Inf]
I have two issues with the above:
1: Cant imagine how someone would use AQ. Which means as Gilles
On Sun, 21 Jul 2013 08:04:05 -0700, Ajo Fod wrote:
The patches for Math-994 have been reworked ... slightly better
design.
Sorry but I don't understand the purpose of adding a patch to
a closed issue...
Here is some numerical analysis on the issue:
Laguerre is defined only in [0,+ve Inf]
On Sun, 21 Jul 2013 08:04:05 -0700, Ajo Fod wrote:
[...]
Here is some numerical analysis on the issue:
Laguerre is defined only in [0,+ve Inf]
Hermite is defined in [-Inf,+Inf]
I have two issues with the above:
1: Cant imagine how someone would use AQ. Which means as Gilles
noticed,
you
Based on the tests you posted it seems like Gauss-Hermite fills the
capability CM was missing of doing one class of improper integrals.
However, the infinite class would have allowed integration from [-Inf,
C!=0].
Can you manage that with Gauss Hermite?
So, given this development, I'm not
On Mon, 24 Jun 2013 07:43:22 -0700, Ajo Fod wrote:
As I read through the Wikipedia articles on Gauss-Hermite and
Laguerre, I
notice that they are talking about basis functions with infinity/s in
its
domain. How would this would solve the problem addressed in the
MATH-994
which is to restrict
On 6/28/13 7:44 AM, Gilles wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jun 2013 07:43:22 -0700, Ajo Fod wrote:
As I read through the Wikipedia articles on Gauss-Hermite and
Laguerre, I
notice that they are talking about basis functions with
infinity/s in its
domain. How would this would solve the problem addressed
On 6/23/13 3:14 PM, Gilles wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jun 2013 22:36:04 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 6/21/13 5:17 PM, Ajo Fod wrote:
I've submitted a patch for the issue (see MATH-994). This will
allow users
to integrate functions with infinity as one of the bounds.
Cheers,
Ajo Fod.
Thanks for
As I read through the Wikipedia articles on Gauss-Hermite and Laguerre, I
notice that they are talking about basis functions with infinity/s in its
domain. How would this would solve the problem addressed in the MATH-994
which is to restrict the bounds of the function being integrated so that
On Sat, 22 Jun 2013 22:36:04 -0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 6/21/13 5:17 PM, Ajo Fod wrote:
I've submitted a patch for the issue (see MATH-994). This will allow
users
to integrate functions with infinity as one of the bounds.
Cheers,
Ajo Fod.
Thanks for bringing the discussion to the dev
On 6/21/13 5:17 PM, Ajo Fod wrote:
I've submitted a patch for the issue (see MATH-994). This will allow users
to integrate functions with infinity as one of the bounds.
Cheers,
Ajo Fod.
Thanks for bringing the discussion to the dev list, Ajo. As Gilles
said on the ticket, its a little
I've submitted a patch for the issue (see MATH-994). This will allow users
to integrate functions with infinity as one of the bounds.
Cheers,
Ajo Fod.
18 matches
Mail list logo
