Skip to main content
Best answer by LucMeekes

The differences you see are due to numerical approximations (when you use a numerical evaluation with '=').

If you let Mathcad solve your problems symbolically you get exact answers.  In your examples with Maple, it determines the solutions symbolically, then (when needed) it converts the answers to numerical answers.

The example above from Fred appears to show an exact match between the numerical approximation and the symbolical solution of the integral over the normal distribution function. But when you tell Prime to show the result with sufficient decimals (15...) then you see the answer is not eactly 1:

Accuracy.png

(This was done with Prime 4.0 express, hence I cannot show the symbolic result.)

In Mathcad 11 (which uses Maple as its symbolic engine) you get:

Accuracy1.png

(If I tell Mathcad 11 to show 15 decimals, it still shows 1 as a numerical result. To show the 'error' I had to subtract 1 from the integral).

Apparently the numerical approximation is done differently from Prime's algorithm, or the settings are different, resulting in a somewhat better approximation of 1 for the integral.

Note that the symbolic result is exact.

 

Success!
Luc

3 replies

23-Emerald I
August 9, 2017

In Prime 3.0, (paid for) I get:

Capture.JPG

10-Marble
August 10, 2017

Hi Fred,

Thank you for your help.

 

--

Jeff

LucMeekes23-Emerald IVAnswer
23-Emerald IV
August 9, 2017

The differences you see are due to numerical approximations (when you use a numerical evaluation with '=').

If you let Mathcad solve your problems symbolically you get exact answers.  In your examples with Maple, it determines the solutions symbolically, then (when needed) it converts the answers to numerical answers.

The example above from Fred appears to show an exact match between the numerical approximation and the symbolical solution of the integral over the normal distribution function. But when you tell Prime to show the result with sufficient decimals (15...) then you see the answer is not eactly 1:

Accuracy.png

(This was done with Prime 4.0 express, hence I cannot show the symbolic result.)

In Mathcad 11 (which uses Maple as its symbolic engine) you get:

Accuracy1.png

(If I tell Mathcad 11 to show 15 decimals, it still shows 1 as a numerical result. To show the 'error' I had to subtract 1 from the integral).

Apparently the numerical approximation is done differently from Prime's algorithm, or the settings are different, resulting in a somewhat better approximation of 1 for the integral.

Note that the symbolic result is exact.

 

Success!
Luc

10-Marble
August 10, 2017

Hi Luc,

Thank you for patient answer the question, solve the problems, i was deeply touched.

I think i will never eaisy suspect the calculation accuracy of CAS because of my poor knowledge foundation.

 

--

Jeff

25-Diamond I
August 9, 2017

For exact results you should use symolic evaluations only:

Bild.png

10-Marble
August 10, 2017

Hi  Werner,

Yes, i redefine the Φ(x) for normal distrubtion function. Really thank you for your guide.

 

 

--

Jeff