MaplePrimes - Newest Questions and Posts

How to integrate the derivative of tanh

C_R — Thu, 03 Sep 2026 21:05:35 Z

I could not figure out why Maple does not return tanh. Instead a complex valued function for real arguments is returned. This is not recent. I tried down to Maple 2020. Is that correct?

>	D(tanh); plot(%)

>	int(D(tanh)(x),x);# I expected tanh plot(%);# ok, no plot for real valued x

Warning, unable to evaluate the function to numeric values in the region; complex values were detected

>	int(D(tanh)(x),x=0..infinity);# this result seems to be known in advance and fits to the above plot

(1)

>	int(D(tanh)(x),x=a..b); eval(%,[a=0,b=infinity]);# I expected 1 from (1) eval(%%,[a=0,b=50.]);# retruns complex for small values

Error, (in ln) numeric exception: division by zero

(2)

>	evalf(int(D(tanh)(x),x=0..50))

(3)

Let's try integrating the identical expression sech^2

(4)

>	is((sech^2=1-tanh^2)(x));# check identity

(5)

>	int(sech(x)^2,x);# what I expected

(6)

Download Integrating_D_tanh.mw

Numeric formatting ignored

Thomasbk — Thu, 03 Sep 2026 09:03:51 Z

Hi everyone,

I am experiencing what appears to be a problem with Numeric Formatting in Maple 2026.

I have a worksheet where I calculate a numerical value using evalf, for example:

evalf(1 - (3.7*90)/(10.4*3600))

which returns

0.4663461539

When I select the output and use the Context Panel → Numeric Format, for example:

Percent
2 decimal places

the preview in the math container changes accordingly (e.g. showing something like 0.45), but the actual numerical output below still displays as

0.4663461539

Changing the number format, decimal places, scientific notation, etc. seems to have no effect on the displayed output.

Even if not using evalf.

Is this the expected behavior in Maple 2026?

Does Numeric Formatting only apply to certain types of expressions or math containers?
Is there a known issue with formatting numerical output generated by evalf?
Am I missing a setting that enables formatting of worksheet output?

I have attached a screenshot illustrating the problem.

Any help or clarification would be appreciated.

Thanks!

Eliminating a discontinuity in an integrand?

Alfred_F — Wed, 02 Sep 2026 13:26:38 Z

I would like to calculate a definite integral in the attached file. Doing so numerically is straightforward. However, a symbolic approach initially fails due to three points of discontinuity in the integrand. Yet, these points can be remedied by taking limits. How can the domain in Maple be extended using these limits to achieve continuity across the entire domain?

testint.mw

Mathematical reformulation and performance

tommycoupe — Tue, 01 Sep 2026 17:02:32 Z

One thing I’ve been experimenting with recently is how much the form of an expression can affect Maple’s performance.

For example, two mathematically equivalent expressions can behave very differently when passed to simplify, solve, dsolve, or numerical procedures.

A useful workflow is to simplify and restructure the problem before asking Maple to do the expensive part.

For example:

restart:

expr := (x^2-1)/(x-1):

simplify(expr);

gives a much simpler expression, but in larger problems the same idea can make a surprisingly big difference.

I’ve also found it useful to inspect intermediate expressions rather than immediately running a large command:

interface(showassumed=0):

simplify(expr, symbolic);
factor(expr);
expand(expr);
collect(expr, x);

The interesting part is that Maple isn't necessarily “slow” because the underlying mathematics is difficult. Sometimes it is simply being asked to work with a representation that hides the structure of the problem.

For large symbolic calculations, I now tend to think of Maple as having two stages:

1. Prepare the mathematics

Reduce, factor, substitute, collect terms, exploit assumptions, and remove unnecessary complexity.

2. Let Maple perform the expensive computation

Only after the expression has been put into a useful form.

This seems particularly important with large nonlinear systems, symbolic integration, and differential equations.

A small change in representation can sometimes turn a calculation that takes minutes into one that takes seconds.

I’d be interested in seeing more examples where Maple's performance was improved simply by changing the mathematical representation of the problem.

dsolve series, number of terms?

Alfred_F — Mon, 31 Aug 2026 08:46:20 Z

I would like to solve a differential equation using a series expansion in the attached file for practice purposes. How can the number of terms in the series solution be adjusted? I couldn't find anything about this in the help text.
BTW:
The differential equation is exceptionally tricky for a symbolic solution ;-) .

testdgl-1.mw

Drawing planes and points

erik10 — Sat, 29 Aug 2026 21:56:03 Z

Dear Maple users

I wanted Maple to draw two planes in 3D with some points on each plane. Each plane are given by an equation of the form a*x+b*y+c*z+d=0. I know there are a number of options.

1. implicitplot3d.

2. Isolate z in the equation in order to plot the plane as the graph of a function of two variables using plot3d.

3. Find two vectors orthogonal to the normal vector and create a plot of a parametrized surface using plot3d.

4. Use the command PlanePlot from the Student:-LinearAlgebra package.

The first option delivers an ugly result due to the grid. It also requires quite a lot of computation internally. The second option can be used, but one need to isolate z in the equation (and what if the plane has the equation z = constant). Option three also is OK, but again require some calculations. The fourth option I just found and it is quite interesting. Unfortunately my points did fall beyond the small square representing the plane, and it seems like there is no way to enlarge this square.

I ended up choosing option 2 and put some transparency on each plane. I am just puzzled why it is so laborious to plot those planes and points. GeoGebra could do it right away.

Or maybe I have overlooked something?

KInd regards,

Erik