On 12/06/2012 12:12 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
So two entirely different questions: 1) Improving the accuracy the statistical (and other numerical methods) we already have. 2) Extending the range of numerical methods we provide out-of-the-box
My first thought when I read this was adding extended precision interval arithmetic; now that would be fun :-)
I think #1 is a no-brainer, but it does require some expertise. The hard part is determining whether we have improved. For most problems we probably already get the same results as SPSS, R or other standard statistical packages. To really make an improvement we need to test the edge cases, the "poorly conditioned" and more complex cases. For #2, it probably makes sense to define a bridge to R. R is now the standard and there are hundreds of libraries that extend the environment. You can call R routines from SAS or SPPS. I just got the new Mathematica 9 upgrade, and guess what? They've now added the ability to call R. So some seamless of calling R routines and embedding R plots in Calc would be great.
I considered upgrading Mathematica, but I am too busy to play around with it these days....
Surprised that they integrate with R. Not because R is a bad thing, just something I had not expected because mathematica already does so much out of the box. Provides instant access to their huge repository of extra stuff.
-- Andrew Pitonyak My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
