disagrees with me? or Emmanuel? Lample's abstract (of the review) concluded with
The claim that this outperforms Mathematica on symbolic integration needs to be very much qualified. I glanced at the full review and I don't see that I disagree with it. Generating 80 million randomly generated expressions, storing them and claiming that you can integrate their derivatives does not become a method for doing integrals. It is a method for looking up expressions in a table. Since most of those expressions will be sums, and the one of the main methods for actually computing integrals is to observe that the integral of a sum is the sum of the integrals, there is very little use for such a table. On Monday, December 16, 2019 at 7:14:02 AM UTC-8, Richard_L wrote: > > Apparently, someone disagrees. See Ernest Lample's posting to the arXiv: > https://arxiv.org/abs/1912.05752 > > On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 8:06:31 AM UTC-7, Dima Pasechnik wrote: >> >> https://openreview.net/pdf?id=S1eZYeHFDS >> >> I wish they had code available... >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/db9f0227-4505-4190-a145-cc14bcaad958%40googlegroups.com.
