Categories

While conducting a workshop for business calculus students one day, I was reminded of a familiar challenge. Many students approach calculus with hesitation, especially those in business programs who may not see themselves as “math people.” Even when they are following the steps, it is not always clear that real understanding is happening.

During the workshop, we were discussing inflation as an example of exponential growth. I wrote the model on the board and explained how prices increase over time. Students were taking notes, but their expressions suggested they were still trying to connect the formula to its meaning.

So I opened Maple Learn.

I entered the equation, and the graph appeared right beside it. Almost immediately, the mood in the room shifted. One student leaned forward and said, “Oh… that’s what inflation looks like over time.”

That simple moment captured why visualization matters so much in calculus.

One of the strengths of Maple Learn is how naturally it combines symbolic work and graphical representation in a single space. Students can write equations, perform calculations, and see the corresponding graphs without switching tools. This makes abstract ideas feel more concrete and easier to interpret.

Maple Learn also works well as a note-taking tool. During the workshop, students kept their formulas, graphs, and written explanations together in one organized document. Instead of passively copying, they were actively building understanding as they worked through the example.

What stood out most was how easily students began sharing their work. They compared graphs, discussed small differences in their models, and asked one another questions. The technology supported conversation and collaboration, helping create a sense of community rather than isolated problem-solving.

By the end of the workshop, students seemed more confident and engaged. The combination of visualization, structured note-taking, and peer sharing helped transform a challenging topic into something accessible and meaningful.

Experiences like this remind me that when students can see mathematics, talk about it, and learn together, calculus becomes far less intimidating and far more powerful.

As a calculus instructor, one thing I’ve noticed year after year is that students don’t struggle with calculus because they’re incapable.

They struggle because calculus is often introduced as a list of procedures rather than as a way of thinking.

In many first-year courses, students quickly become focused on rules: differentiate this, integrate that, memorize formulas, repeat steps. And while procedural fluency is certainly part of learning mathematics, I’ve found that this approach can sometimes come at the cost of deeper understanding.

Students begin to feel that calculus is something to survive, rather than something to make sense of.

Research supports this concern when calculus becomes overly mechanical; students often miss the conceptual meaning behind the mathematics. That realization has pushed me to reflect more carefully on what I want students to take away from my class.

Over time, I’ve become increasingly interested in teaching approaches that emphasize mathematical thinking, not just computation.

Thinking Beyond Formulas

When I teach calculus, I want students to ask questions that go beyond getting the right answer:

1. What does this derivative actually represent?
2. How does the function behave when something changes?
3. Why do certain patterns keep appearing again and again?

These kinds of questions are often where real learning begins.

In The Role of Maple Learn in Teaching and Learning Calculus Through Mathematical Thinking, mathematical thinking is described through three key processes:

1. Specializing - exploring specific examples
2. Conjecturing - noticing patterns and testing ideas
3. Generalizing - extending those patterns into broader principles

This framework captures the kind of reasoning I hope students develop as they move through calculus.

What Helps Students See the Mathematics

One of the biggest challenges in teaching calculus is helping students see the mathematics, not just perform it.

It’s easy for students to get stuck in algebraic steps before they ever have the chance to build intuition. I’ve found that students learn more effectively when they can explore examples, visualize behavior, and experiment with ideas early on.

Sometimes that happens through discussion, sometimes through carefully chosen problems, and sometimes through interactive tools that allow students to test patterns quickly.

The goal isn’t to replace thinking it’s to support it.

A Meaningful Example

One activity highlighted in the study, Inflation and Time Travel, places exponential growth into a context students can relate to: wages and inflation.

When students adjust values, observe trends, and ask what happens over long periods of time, calculus becomes much more than an abstract requirement. It becomes a way of understanding real phenomena.

Activities like this remind students that mathematics is not just symbolic work on paper; it is a way of describing and interpreting the world.

Final Thoughts

For me, calculus is not meant to be a barrier course.

It’s meant to be a gateway into powerful ways of reasoning about change, structure, and patterns.

When students begin to specialize, make conjectures, and generalize ideas for themselves, they start to experience calculus as something meaningful, not just mechanical.

And as an instructor, that is exactly what I hope to cultivate in my classroom.

If one of our posts showed up in your social media feed recently, you may have found yourself staring at a giant maple leaf with feet and thinking, “Wait… who (or what) is that?” you’re not alone. 

Yes, that big, cheerful leaf you’ve been seeing is very real. 
And yes, they have a name. 

Meet Mathy. 

We officially introduced Mathy to the world a couple of weeks ago at JMM 2026 in Washington, DC, but their story actually started much earlier. 

Mathy was originally created by one of our developers, Marek Krzeminski, a few years ago as a fun internal character. Over time, they quietly became our in-office, local mathscot, popping up as mini 3D-printed Mathys around the office and even as a custom emoji someone created. 

Then, sometime last year, someone had what can only be described as a bold idea: 

What if we brought Mathy to life? 

And just like that, the giant maple leaf went from concept to costume. 

Mathy is fun, curious, and a little playful. That’s very intentional. That’s what math should feel like. 

We believe math matters. We also believe math should be approachable, joyful, and a place where curiosity is rewarded. Mathy reminds us, and hopefully others, that math doesn’t have to be intimidating. It can be fun, and it can inspire awe. 

I’ll be honest. When we decided to bring Mathy to JMM, I was a little nervous. Conferences are busy, serious places. Would people really want to interact with a seven-foot-tall maple leaf? 

As it turns out, yes. Very much yes. 

Researchers (from postdocs to seasoned academics), educators, and undergraduate and graduate students all stopped, smiled, laughed, and asked for photos. At one point, people were actually lining up to take pictures with Mathy.

Let’s just say: Mathy was a hit. 

How tall is Mathy? 
About 7 feet. They are hard to miss. 

What does Mathy love (besides math)? 
Dancing. Very much dancing. 
You can see for yourself here: Mathy's got moves!

Does Mathy talk? 
You bet they do. 

Now that Mathy has officially been introduced to the world, you’ll be seeing them more often on social media, at events, and in a few other fun places we’re cooking up. 

So if you spot a giant maple leaf dancing, waving, or talking math, now you know who they are. 

If you spot Mathy, don’t be shy, say hi. 

Many problems in mathematics are easy to define and conceptualize, but take a bit of deeper thinking to actually solve. Check out the Olympiad-style question (from this link) below:

Former Maplesoft co-op student Callum Laverance decided to make a document in Maple Learn to de-bunk this innocent-looking problem and used the powerful tools within Maple Learn to show step-by-step how to think of this problem. The first step, I recommend, would be to play around with possible values of a and b for inspiration. See how I did this below:

Based on the snippet above, we might guess that a = 0.5 and b = 1.9. The next step is to think of some equations that may be useful to help us actually solve for these values. Since the square has a side length of 4, we know its area must be 4² = 16. Therefore, the Yellow, Green and Red areas must add exactly to 16. That is,

With a bit of calculus and Maple Learn's context panel, we can integrate the function f(x) = ax² from x = -2 to x = 2 and set it equal to this value of 8/3. This allows us to solve for the value of a.

We see that a = 1/2. Since the area of the Red section must be three times that of the Yellow (which we determined above to be 8/3), we get Red = (8/3)*3 = 8.

The last step is to find the value of b. In the figure below, we know that the line y = 4 and the curve y = bx² intersect when bx² = 4 (i.e. when x = ± 2/sqrt(b)).

Since we know the area of the red section is 8 square units, that must be the difference between the entire area underneath the horiztonal line at y = 4 and the curve y = bx² on the interval [-2/sqrt(b), 2/sqrt(b)]. We can then write the area of the Red section as an integral in terms of b, then solve for the value of b, since we know the Red area is equal to 8.

Voila! Setting a = 1/2 and b = 16/9 ≈ 1.8 guarantees that the ratio of Yellow to Green to Red area within the square is 1:2:3, respectively. Note this is quite close to our original guess of a = 0.5 and b = 1.9. With a bit of algebra and solving a couple of integrals, we were able to solve a mathematics Olympiad problem!

This post stems from this Question to which the author has never taken the time to give any answer whatsoever.

To help the reader understand what this is all about, I reproduce an abriged version of this question

I have the following data ... [and I want to]  create a cumulative histogram with corresponding polygon employing this same information...

The data the author refers to is a collection of decimal numbers.

The term "histogram" has a very well meaning in Statistics, without entering into technical details, let us say an histogram is an estimator of a Probability Density Function (continuous random variable) or of a mass function (discrete random variable), see for instance Freedman & Diaconis.

The expression "cumulative histogram" is more recent, see for instance Wiki for a quick explanation. Shortly a cumulative histogram can be seen as an approximation of the Cumulative Density Function (CDF) of the random variable whose the sample at hand is drawn from.

In fact there exists an alternative concept named ECDF (Empirical Cumulative Distribution Function) which has been around for a long time and which is already an estimator of the CDF.
Personally I am always surprised, given the many parameters it depends upon (anchors, number of bins, binwidth selection method, ...), when someone wants to draw a cumulative histogram: Why not draw instead the ECDF, a more objective estimator, even simpler to build than the cumulative histogram, and which does not use any parameter (that people often tune to get a pretty image instead of having a reliable estimator)? 

Anyway, I have done a little bit of work arround the OP's question, and it ended in a procedure named Hodgepodge (surely not a very explicit name but I was lacking inspiration) which enables plotting (if asked) several informations in addition to the required cumulative histogram:

• The histogram of the raw data for the same list of bin bounds.
• The kernel density estimator of this raw-data-histogram.
• The ECDF of the data.

Here is an example of data

and here is what procedure Hodgepodge.mw  can display when all the graphics are requested

Hello all,

This is a post for a software change.

I think it would be great if Maple had some constructions for :

i++

++i

i--

--i and idem for multiply and divide.

I guess it is too late for Maple 2026, but maybe this could be added for 2027.

i++ does work however.

Have a great day.

Jean-Michel

PS:You must have a reputation score of at least 100 to add a new tag. (???)

Sorry : I just see that this  is already implemented in Maple.

Thank you

This way back machine shows how Maple debugger looked like in the year 2005 (that is 20 years ago) in Maple 10.

And it is pretty much the same debugger today. Here is a screen shot side by side of recent version

20 YEARS and nothing changed.

The debugger in Maple is one, if not the main, selling point for Maple compared to its competitor for many.

Even the article above says this

     "But the big plus about the Maple language is that it has a debugger! "

     "Also, the existence of a reasonable debugger in Maple is a big plus. From
      personal experience, I can tell you that debugging Mathematica Notebooks
     can be both time consuming and frustrating."

Can the debugger be improved, so it is easier to use? 

All what is needed is to change the UI so  one can see more code as they are stepping in, like with Matlab debugger for example.

That is all. Currently it is a pain using the debugger, since one only sees one or 2-3  lines at time as they step in the code instead of seeing complete code with full screen which makes it much easier to see things.

Instead of Maplesoft wasting time on AI and cosmetics, do something practical for developers and improve the debugger.

It should not take a software company 40 years just to improve a UI for a debugger. What is the blocking issue here? 

Just hire one or two programmers and they can do this in 6 months.

It would be useful to have Time-Frequency signal processing tools in Maple, for non-stationary spectral analysis. One example is the Wigner-Ville Transform, along with a range of others (e.g. STFT)

The inscribed square problem, also known as the Toeplitz conjecture, is an unsolved quastion in geometry: Does every plane simple closed curve (Jordan curve) contain all four vertices of some square? This is true if the curve is convex or piecewise smooth and in other special cases. The problem was proposed by Otto Toeplitz in 1911. For detailes see  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inscribed_square_problem

The Inscribed_Square procedure finds numerically one or more solutions for a curve defined by parametric equations of its boundary or by the equation F(x,y)=0. The required parameter of procedure  L  is the list of equations of the boundary links or the equation  F(x,y)=0 . Optional parameters:  N  and  R . By default  N='onesolution' (the procedure finds one solution), if  N  is any symbol (for example  N='s'), then more solutions.  R  is the range for the length of the side of the square (by defalt  R=0.1..100 ).

The second procedure  Pic  visualizes the results obtained.

The codes of the procedures:

restart;
Inscribed_Square:=proc(L::{list(list),`=`},N::symbol:='onesolution',R::range:=0.1..100)
local D, n, c, L1, L2, L3, f, L0, i, j, k, m, A, B, C, P, M, eq1, eq2, eq3, eq4, eq5, eq6, eq7, eq8, eq9, sol, Sol;
uses LinearAlgebra;
if L::list then
L0:=map(p->`if`(type(p,listlist),[[p[1,1]+t*(p[2]-p[1])[1],p[1,2]+t*(p[2]-p[1])[2]],t=0..1],p), L);
c:=0;
n:=nops(L);
for i from 1 to n do
for j from i to n do
for k from j to n do
for m from k to n do
A:=convert(subs(t=t1,L0[i,1]),Vector): 
B:=convert(subs(t=t2,L0[j,1]),Vector):
C:=convert(subs(t=t3,L0[k,1]),Vector): 
D:=convert(subs(t=t4,L0[m,1]),Vector):
M:=<0,-1;1,0>;
eq1:=eval(C[1])=eval((B+M.(B-A))[1]);
eq2:=eval(C[2])=eval((B+M.(B-A))[2]);
eq3:=eval(D[1])=eval((C+M.(C-B))[1]);
eq4:=eval(D[2])=eval((C+M.(C-B))[2]);
eq5:=eval(DotProduct(B-A,B-A, conjugate=false))=d^2;
sol:=fsolve([eq1,eq2,eq3,eq4,eq5],{t1=op([2,2,1],L0[i])..op([2,2,2],L0[i]),t2=op([2,2,1],L0[j])..op([2,2,2],L0[j]),t3=op([2,2,1],L0[k])..op([2,2,2],L0[k]),t4=op([2,2,1],L0[m])..op([2,2,2],L0[m]),d=R});
if type(sol,set(`=`)) then if N='onesolution' then return convert~(eval([A,B,C,D],sol),list) else c:=c+1; Sol[c]:=convert~(eval([A,B,C,D],sol),list) fi;
 fi; 
od: od: od: od:
Sol:=fnormal(convert(Sol,list),7);
print(Sol);
ListTools:-Categorize((X,Y)->`and`(seq(is(convert(X,set)[i]=convert(Y,set)[i]),i=1..4)) , Sol);
return map(t->t[1],[%]);
else
A,B,C,D:=<x1,y1>,<x2,y2>,<x3,y3>,<x4,y4>:
M:=<0,-1;1,0>:
eq1:=eval(C[1])=eval((B+M.(B-A))[1]):
eq2:=eval(C[2])=eval((B+M.(B-A))[2]):
eq3:=eval(D[1])=eval((C+M.(C-B))[1]):
eq4:=eval(D[2])=eval((C+M.(C-B))[2]):
eq5:=eval(LinearAlgebra:-DotProduct((B-A,B-A), conjugate=false))=d^2:
eq6:=eval(L,[x=x1,y=y1]):
eq7:=eval(L,[x=x2,y=y2]):
eq8:=eval(L,[x=x3,y=y3]):
eq9:=eval(L,[x=x4,y=y4]):
sol:=fsolve({eq1,eq2,eq3,eq4,eq5,eq6,eq7,eq8,eq9},{seq([x||i=-2..2,y||i=-2..2][],i=1..4),d=R});
eval([[x1,y1],[x2,y2],[x3,y3],[x4,y4]], sol):
fi;
end proc:

Pic:=proc(L,Sol,R::range:=-20..20)
local P1, P2, P3, T;
uses plots, plottools;
P1:=`if`(L::list,seq(`if`(type(s,listlist),line(s[],color=blue, thickness=2),plot([s[1][],s[2]],color=blue, thickness=2)),s=L), implicitplot(L, x=R,y=R, color=blue, thickness=2, gridrefine=3));
P2:=polygon(Sol,color=yellow,thickness=0);
P3:=curve([Sol[],Sol[1]],color=red,thickness=3):
T:=textplot([[Sol[1][],"A"],[Sol[2][],"B"],[Sol[3][],"C"],[Sol[4][],"D"]], font=[times,18], align=[left,above]);
display(P1,P2,P3,T, scaling=constrained, size=[800,500], axes=none);
end proc:

Examples of use:

The curve consists of a semicircle, a segment and a semi-ellipse (find 1 solution):

L:=[[[cos(t),sin(t)],t=0..Pi],[[t,0],t=-1..0],[[0.5+0.5*cos(t),0.8*sin(t)],t=Pi..2*Pi]]:
Sol:=Inscribed_Square(L);
Pic(L,Sol);

The procedure finds 6 solutions for a non-convex pentagon:

 L:=[[[0,0],[9,0]],[[9,0],[8,5]],[[8,5],[5,3]],[[5,3],[0,4]],[[0,4],[0,0]]]:
Sol:=Inscribed_Square(L,'s');
plots:-display(Matrix(3,2,[seq(Pic(L,Sol[i]),i=1..6)]),size=[300,200]);

For an implicitly defined curve, only one solution can be found:

L:=abs(x)+2*abs(y)-sin((2*x-y))-cos(x+y)^2=3:
Sol:=Inscribed_Square(L);
Pic(L,Sol);

               
See more examples in the attached file.

Inscribed_Square.mw

Hi again all,

prime numbers are fun for me.

see

pairs_of_prime_numbers_procedure_with_union_and_isprime.pdf

sorry, could not find the .mw file,

but the code is small, and easy to copy

this is fun for me, here in Keizer OR, USA

Party on, everyone

Best regards,

Matt

https://mattanderson.fun/

Hi Maplesoft Support / Community,

I've encountered a critical and bizarre bug involving Bits:-And correctness on large integers (~30 digits) derived from repeated integerdivq2exp operations.

• Maple 2023 (Linux x86_64)
• Maple 2025 (Linux x86_64)
• Maple 2025 (Windows x86_64)

The correctness of Bits:-And depends on the order of execution. 

(See attached common.mpl, bug_test2.mpl, bug_test3.mpl logic).

Case "Fail" (bug_test2.mpl):

1. Run operation (loops `integerdivq2exp`).
2. Print result num1 (semicolon).
3. Define num1_clean (hardcoded same value).
4. Bits:-And(num1) -> INCORRECT.
5. Bits:-And(num1_clean) -> INCORRECT.

Case "Pass" (bug_test3.mpl):

1. Define num1_clean.
2. Run operation (loops integerdivq2exp).
3. Bits:-And(num1) -> CORRECT.
4. Bits:-And(num1_clean) -> CORRECT.

The same behaviour can be observed in Worksheet mode using read.  (See worksheet_driver.mw)

But the result cannot be reproduced if not using read. (See worksheet_version.mw and worksheet_version2.mw)

Code below:

N := 2100:
n := 1000:
num := rand(0 .. 2^N)():
operation := proc(num, n)
    local q, k;
    q := num;
    for k from 1 to 2 do
        q := integerdivq2exp(q, n); 
    end do;
    q;
end proc:

read "common.mpl";

num1 := operation(num, n);
num1_clean := 1083029963437854242395921050992;

num1_clean_And_result := Bits:-And(num1_clean, integermul2exp(1, n) - 1);
num1_And_result := Bits:-And(num1, integermul2exp(1, n) - 1);

##################################

expected_result := irem(num1_clean, integermul2exp(1, n));

if num1 <> num1_clean then
    error "num1 does not match num1_clean";
end if;
print("num1 matches num1_clean");

if num1_And_result <> num1_clean_And_result then
    error "num1_And_result does not match num1_clean_And_result";
end if;
print("num1_And_result matches num1_clean_And_result");

if num1_And_result <> expected_result then
    error "num1_And_result does not match expected_result";
end if;
print("num1_And_result matches expected_result");

read "common.mpl";

num1_clean := 1083029963437854242395921050992:
num1 := operation(num, n):

num1_clean_And_result := Bits:-And(num1_clean, integermul2exp(1, n) - 1):
num1_And_result := Bits:-And(num1, integermul2exp(1, n) - 1);

##################################

expected_result := irem(num1_clean, integermul2exp(1, n));

if num1 <> num1_clean then
    error "num1 does not match num1_clean";
end if;
print("num1 matches num1_clean");

if num1_And_result <> num1_clean_And_result then
    error "num1_And_result does not match num1_clean_And_result";
end if;
print("num1_And_result matches num1_clean_And_result");

if num1_And_result <> expected_result then
    error "num1_And_result does not match expected_result";
end if;
print("num1_And_result matches expected_result");

As I have stated "a few times" here on Maple Primes, I've written a new book with Nic Fillion on perturbation methods.  The book will be published by SIAM early next year.  To help market the book, I sent several images to my editor who asked her team to make a desk calendar out of them.  The PDF for that is

here at this link to my web page at github

I had fun making the images, in Maple, and the QR code on the calendar links to a Maple Transactions paper that describes each of the images.  To save you struggling with your QR code reader, here is a link to that paper.

Best wishes for the season and for 2026.

Over the past year, I have spent a lot of time talking to educators, researchers, and engineers about AI. The feeling is almost universal: it is impressive, it is helpful, but you should absolutely not trust it with your math even if it sounds confident.

That tension between how capable AI feels and how accurate it actually is has been on my mind for months. AI is not going away. The challenge now is figuring out how to make it reliable.

That is where Maple MCP comes in.

Maple MCP (Model Context Protocol) connects large language models like ChatGPT, Claude, Cohere, and Perplexity to Maple’s world-class math engine.

When your AI encounters math, your AI can turn to Maple to handle the computation so the results are ones you can actually trust.

It is a simple idea, but an important one: Maple does the math and the AI does the talking. Instead of guessing, the AI can be directed to call on Maple whenever accuracy matters.

Model Context Protocol (MCP) is an emerging open standard that allows AI systems to connect to external tools and data sources. It gives language models a structured way to request computations, pass inputs, and receive reliable outputs, rather than trying to predict everything in text form.

Here is a high-level view of how MCP fits into the broader ecosystem:

MCP lets an AI system connect securely to specialized services, like Maple, that provide capabilities the model does not have on its own.

If you want to learn more about the MCP standard, the documentation is a great starting point: Model Context Protocol documentation

Here is a glimpse of what happens when Maple joins the conversation:

Depending on the prompt, Maple MCP can evaluate expressions symbolically or numerically, execute Maple code, expand or factor expressions, integrate or solve equations, and even generate interactive visualizations. If you ask for an exploration or an activity, it can create a Maple Learn document with the parameters and sliders already in place.

As an example of how this plays out in practice, I asked Maple MCP:

“I'd like to create an interactive math activity in Maple that allows my students to explore the tangent of a line for the function f(x) = sin(x) + 0.5x for various values of x.”

It generated a complete Maple Learn activity that was ready to use and share. You can open the interactive version here: interactive tangent line activity .

In full disclosure, I did have to go back and forth a bit to get the exact results I wanted, mostly because my prompt wasn’t very specific, but the process was smooth, and I know it will only get better over time.

What is exciting is that this does not replace the LLM; it complements it. The model still explains, reasons, and interacts naturally. Maple simply steps in to do the math—the part AI cannot reliably do on its own.

We have opened the Maple MCP public beta, and I would love for you to try it.

Sign up today and we will send you everything you need to get started!

My student, David Wei, has ported Andrew Hicks's MOISE package to Maple 2025:

GitHub - david-wei-01001/MOISE-for-Maple-2025: MOISE that is compatible with the newest Maple 2025 Engine

Regards,

Gerald Penn

The Autumn Issue is now up, at mapletransactions.org

This issue contains two Featured Contributions; a short but very interesting one by Gilbert Labelle on a topic very dear to my own heart, and a longer and also very interesting one by Wadim Zudilin.  I asked Doron Zeilberger about Wadim's paper, and he said "this is a true gem with lots of insight and making connections between different approaches."

The "Editor's Corner" paper is a little different, this time.  This paper is largely the work of my co-author, Michelle Hatzel, extracted and revised from her Masters' thesis which she defended successfully this past August.  I hope that you find it as interesting as I did.

We have three refereed contributions, a contribution on the use of Maple Learn in teaching, and a little note on my design of the 2026 Calendar for my upcoming SIAM book with Nic Fillion, as well.  All the images for the calendar were generated in Maple (as were most of the images in the book).

It's been fun to put this issue together (with an enormous amount of help from Michelle) and I hope that you enjoy reading it.

I would also like to thank the Associate Editors who handled the refereeing: Dhavide Aruliah, David Jeffrey, and Viktor Levandovskyy.