Maple Questions and Posts

These are Posts and Questions associated with the product, Maple

How to futher simplify so that we could exact value

Hello

I use Maple 20018.2.

When I use "Data Set Search" and press Search I get following Error Message. I check that the network access to the internet is on enable. Does anybody has an Idea?

thank you

Murad

I'm trying to obtain the dynamical response of a simply-supported beam with a cantilever extension, coupled to a spring-mass system. In mathematical terms, this system is ruled by three PDEs (relative to each bare part of the main structure) and one ODE (relative to the spring-mass system). I think my mathemical model is finely formulated, but Maple keeps telling me this:

Error, (in pdsolve/numeric/process_IBCs) improper op or subscript selector

I believe it is because my PDEs depend on "x" and "t", while the ODE depends solely on "t". I have tried to transform my ODE into a "PDE", making it also dependent of "x", but without imposing any boundary conditions relative to "x". However, after this Maple points a new error message:

Error, (in pdsolve/numeric) initial/boundary conditions must be defined at one or two points for each independent variable

Could someone help me finding a solution? My algorythm in shown in the attached file below.

Worksheet.mw

Hello

I wonder if someone on the list can give me some guidelines on how to use Grid:-Seq.

I have applied Grid:-Set and Grid:-Seq to one of my problems where parallelization is a possibility.   In this problem, I have a massive list of lists that needs to be processed in chunks and then a new list is returned.

What I've found so far:

1) Grid-Seq won't work if I use a procedure from a private module that calls local (or exported) functions of the same module.  Solution:  I need to use savelib (there is a bug in Grid:-Seq)

2) Grid-Seqs seems to be working fine up to a point where it simply stops.  For example:   Starting with 431895 sets, the procedure divides them into 864 sets of 500 elements (the last one does not usually contain 500 elements).  Then I use res:=Grid:-Seq['tasksize'=9](myFunction(newSets[i],...,....),i=1..864).   The messages sent out by Grid:-Seq are 

Seq: using tasksize=9; number of elements= 864, number of partitions = 96

......

Seq: done sending all partitions

Seq: received results from all nodes; collating results

After two hours running and using 36 cores, the result is available in res.  The next step is to use the results in res for another cycle of calculations.  1503462 sets = 3007 sets of 500 elements.  The messages sent out by Grid:Seq are 

Seq: using tasksize=9; number of elements= 3007, number of partitions = 335

......

Seq: done sending all partitions

The last message showed up on the screen after an hour. During the process, I saw the current tasks finishing and new ones starting.  However I could not see "Seq: received results from all nodes; collating result" after a day running.  I am using timelimit to be sure that all calculations will finish no matter what.  

I have checked the system information and found that: 1) all 72 cores are running but they are jumping from 0% to 100% (in the example that works I could see all of them in 100% solid), 2) Memory is at 156 GB (200 Gb is the limit) and no swap to disk.

I have also noticed:

  1. If I use Maple 2017, not even the first example works.
  2. tasksize=9 somehow helps with similar problems.  If the size is left for Maple to decide, it seems that the problem happens for sets of smaller size.
  3. On linux I had to use "kill -9" to remove maple from every single core. My impression is that Grid:-Seq does not clean up the processes after they finished.  
  4.  The problem seems to be on "results from all nodes; collating result".

 

I know that the explanation above in rather vague, but if someone has any clue or guidelines on how to solve this problem, please share it with me.

 

Many thanks

 

Ed

 

 

 

Hello everyone, 

I have a parametric plot which you can see in the first image below, g and t are both functions of (p,v). I have fixed the value of p in the functions then plotted for v, and you can see the resulting plot (i am only interested in the blue figure) there is an intersection. 

The maximum value p is aloud to have in my functions 1/(12*pi) which i am approximating to 0.026. So what i am trying to do is for p from 0.026 to 0 obtain values of t for each p then plot then with pointplot with arrays i have made after solving the equations. However the plot which i am obtaining is not matching what i want see second image below. 

 

I have attached my code so you can see what i have done and how my image doesnt match any help would be appreciate, Thanks.Solving_Equation_.mw

restart;
plot([sin(x), sin(x), x=0..420]);

The matrix A := op([1,1], %)  has equal columns, so the bug is in the PLOT engine.
plot(A) generates the same plot.
See also the "circle":
plot([cos(x), sin(x), x=0..5000*Pi]);

 

Dear all

I need to display a matrix K defined in the attached maple code.

Thanks for your help

matrix.mw

If A then B After clustering B , how to find a set of A in machine learning topic and fuzzy topic?

Hi, 

I represent 3 thin parallel slices of colors red, green and blue; all have the same transparency equal to 0.5
For the default orientation of the display, the blue slice is on the forefront, the red one in the background and the green one in beween. Then the blue slice is "bluer" than green and  the green one "greener" than red (FIG 1)
If you rotate manually the figure in order to place the red slice in the forefront and the blue one in the background, you expect to have the red slice "redder" than the green one and the green one "greener" than the blue one (FIG 2)
This is not the case.

The order in which the slices appear in the PLOT3D command defines the foreground and the background, but these latter are not dynamically recalculated when the figure is rotated.
To recover the correct colors one must revert the order of the slices in PLOT3D (FIG 3)

Are we comdamned to change to change manually the order of the slices in PLOT3D or does it exist an option whixh avoids doing so?

Don't pay too much attention to the plots above for the foreground is strangely correct on figure 2 ???

restart

with(plottools):

alpha := Pi/18.:
a := 2*cos(alpha):
b := 2*sin(alpha):
e := 0.02:
p := [[0,0,0],[a,b,0],[a,b,1],[0,0,1]],
     [[0,e,0],[a,b+e,0],[a,b+e,1],[0,e,1]],
     [[0,0,0],[0,e,0],[0,e,1],[0,0,1]],
     [[a,b,0],[a,b+e,0],[a,b+e,1],[a,b,1]],
     [[0,0,0],[a,b,0],[a,b+e,0],[0,e,0]],
     [[0,0,1],[a,b,1],[a,b+e,1],[0,e,1]]

[[0, 0, 0], [1.969615506, .3472963554, 0], [1.969615506, .3472963554, 1], [0, 0, 1]], [[0, 0.2e-1, 0], [1.969615506, .3672963554, 0], [1.969615506, .3672963554, 1], [0, 0.2e-1, 1]], [[0, 0, 0], [0, 0.2e-1, 0], [0, 0.2e-1, 1], [0, 0, 1]], [[1.969615506, .3472963554, 0], [1.969615506, .3672963554, 0], [1.969615506, .3672963554, 1], [1.969615506, .3472963554, 1]], [[0, 0, 0], [1.969615506, .3472963554, 0], [1.969615506, .3672963554, 0], [0, 0.2e-1, 0]], [[0, 0, 1], [1.969615506, .3472963554, 1], [1.969615506, .3672963554, 1], [0, 0.2e-1, 1]]

(1)

f   := k -> transform((x, y, z) -> [x, y+k, z]):
col := k-> COLOR(RGB, op(ListTools:-Rotate([1, 0, 0], -k))):
t   := TRANSPARENCY(0.5):
PLOT3D(POLYGONS(p, t, col(0)), f(1)(POLYGONS(p, t, col(1))), f(2)(POLYGONS(p, t, col(2))), AXESLABELS(2, 3, 1))

 

PLOT3D(POLYGONS(p, t, col(0)), f(1)(POLYGONS(p, t, col(1))), f(2)(POLYGONS(p, t, col(2))), AXESLABELS(2, 3, 1))

 

PLOT3D(f(2)(POLYGONS(p, t, col(2))), f(1)(POLYGONS(p, t, col(1))), POLYGONS(p, t, col(0)), AXESLABELS(2, 3, 1))

 

 


 

Download Background_Foreground.mw

Can anyone help me to frame the equations in Fractional Reduced Differential Transform Method 

system of nonlinear ordinary differential equations
ds/ dt = b−γ s(t)− (δ s(t)(i(t) + βa(t)) /N − ε s(t) m(t) 
de/ dt = δ (s(t)(i(t) + βa(t))/ N + ε s(t) m(t) − (1−ϑ) θ e(t) − ϑ α e(t) − γ e(t) 
di/ dt = (1−ϑ) θ e(t) − (ρ + γ) i(t)
da/ dt = ϑ α e(t) − (σ + γ) a(t)
dr /dt = ρ i(t) + σ a(t) − γ r(t)
dm /dt = τ i(t) + κ a(t) − ω m(t) 

choosing lightmodel=none and shading=none, produces a dark grey grided surface
plot3d(x*y, x = 0 .. 10, y = 0 .. 10, lightmodel = none, shading = none)

adding the style=wireframe option gives a blank plot.  Grid probably white?  Changing style to patchnogrid the surface is indeed white. However chosing both shading and style options to none regardless of the lightmodel will produce a plot that appears empty.  Is this to be expected?

However, just the style=wireframe option produces a colored grided wireframe as to expect
plot3d(x*y, x = 0 .. 10, y = 0 .. 10, lightmodel = none, style = wireframe)

Dear users

All my recent questions are removed by "mapleprimes" automatically. who knows the reason?

restart;
solve({l*(2*l^2*lambda^4*sigma*w*a[2]+l^2*lambda^2*mu*w*b[1]+6*l*lambda^2*m*sigma*a[0]^2-6*l*lambda^2*m*b[1]^2+6*l*m*mu^2*a[0]^2-l*lambda^2*rho*sigma*a[0]-l*mu^2*rho*a[0]+4*lambda^2*sigma*w*a[0]+4*mu^2*w*a[0]) = 0, l*(2*l^2*lambda^3*sigma*w*a[1]+6*l^2*lambda^2*mu*w*b[2]+2*l^2*lambda*mu^2*w*a[1]+12*l*lambda^2*m*sigma*a[0]*a[1]-12*l*lambda^2*m*b[1]*b[2]-l*lambda^2*rho*sigma*a[1]+12*l*m*mu^2*a[0]*a[1]-l*mu^2*rho*a[1]+4*lambda^2*sigma*w*a[1]+4*mu^2*w*a[1]) = 0, l*(5*l^2*lambda^3*sigma*w*b[2]-3*l^2*lambda^2*mu*sigma*w*a[1]-7*l^2*lambda*mu^2*w*b[2]-3*l^2*mu^3*w*a[1]+12*l*lambda^2*m*sigma*a[0]*b[2]+12*l*lambda^2*m*sigma*a[1]*b[1]-l*lambda^2*rho*sigma*b[2]+24*l*lambda*m*mu*b[1]*b[2]+12*l*m*mu^2*a[0]*b[2]+12*l*m*mu^2*a[1]*b[1]-l*mu^2*rho*b[2]+4*lambda^2*sigma*w*b[2]+4*mu^2*w*b[2]) = 0, l*(8*l^2*lambda^3*sigma*w*a[2]+6*l^2*lambda*mu^2*w*a[2]+12*l*lambda^2*m*sigma*a[0]*a[2]+6*l*lambda^2*m*sigma*a[1]^2+l^2*lambda*mu*w*b[1]-6*l*lambda^2*m*b[2]^2-l*lambda^2*rho*sigma*a[2]+12*l*m*mu^2*a[0]*a[2]+6*l*m*mu^2*a[1]^2-6*l*lambda*m*b[1]^2-l*mu^2*rho*a[2]+4*lambda^2*sigma*w*a[2]+4*mu^2*w*a[2]) = 0, -l*(4*l^2*lambda^3*mu*sigma*w*a[2]-l^2*lambda^3*sigma*w*b[1]+l^2*lambda*mu^2*w*b[1]-12*l*lambda^2*m*sigma*a[0]*b[1]+l*lambda^2*rho*sigma*b[1]-12*l*lambda*m*mu*b[1]^2-12*l*m*mu^2*a[0]*b[1]+l*mu^2*rho*b[1]-4*lambda^2*sigma*w*b[1]-4*mu^2*w*b[1]) = 0, 6*l^2*(l*lambda^2*sigma*w*a[2]+lambda^2*m*sigma*a[2]^2+l*mu^2*w*a[2]+m*mu^2*a[2]^2-lambda*m*b[2]^2) = 0, 2*l^2*(l*lambda^2*sigma*w*a[1]+6*lambda^2*m*sigma*a[1]*a[2]+3*l*lambda*mu*w*b[2]+l*mu^2*w*a[1]+6*m*mu^2*a[1]*a[2]-6*lambda*m*b[1]*b[2]) = 0, -2*l^2*(5*l*lambda^2*mu*sigma*w*a[2]-l*lambda^2*sigma*w*b[1]+5*l*mu^3*w*a[2]-6*lambda^2*m*sigma*a[1]*b[2]-6*lambda^2*m*sigma*a[2]*b[1]-l*mu^2*w*b[1]-6*lambda*m*mu*b[2]^2-6*m*mu^2*a[1]*b[2]-6*m*mu^2*a[2]*b[1]) = 0, 6*l^2*b[2]*(l*w+2*m*a[2]) = 0}, {a[0], a[1], a[2], b[1], b[2]});
Warning, solutions may have been lost
{a[0] = 0, a[1] = 0, a[2] = 0, b[1] = 0, b[2] = 0}, 

   /       l rho - 4 w                                        \ 
  { a[0] = -----------, a[1] = 0, a[2] = 0, b[1] = 0, b[2] = 0 }
   \          6 l m                                           / 
 

HOW TO WRITE BOX COUNTING DIMENSION IN FRCATAL

Hi.

I'm working on an electronics project currently. In that project I have been trying to solve a system of inequalities, as shown by the picture from Maple below:

restart;

R__1 := 1;
lign1 := V__i/(R__4*(1/R__1 + 1/R__2 + 1/R__3 + 1/R__4)) = C*(k__1 - R/R__C + R);
lign2 := V__i*(1/R__1 + 1/R__4)/(1/R__1 + 1/R__2 + 1/R__3 + 1/R__4) = C*(k__2 - R/R__C + R);
lign3 := V__i*(1/R__2 + 1/R__4)/(1/R__1 + 1/R__2 + 1/R__3 + 1/R__4) = C*(k__3 - R/R__C + R);
lign4 := V__i*(1/R__3 + 1/R__4)/(1/R__1 + 1/R__2 + 1/R__3 + 1/R__4) = C*(k__4 - R/R__C + R);
lign5 := V__i*(1/R__1 + 1/R__2 + 1/R__4)/(1/R__1 + 1/R__2 + 1/R__3 + 1/R__4) = C*(k__5 - R/R__C + R);
lign6 := V__i*(1/R__1 + 1/R__3 + 1/R__4)/(1/R__1 + 1/R__2 + 1/R__3 + 1/R__4) = C*(k__6 - R/R__C + R);
lign7 := V__i*(1/R__2 + 1/R__3 + 1/R__4)/(1/R__1 + 1/R__2 + 1/R__3 + 1/R__4) = C*(k__7 - R/R__C + R);
solve({lign1, lign2, lign3, lign4, lign5, lign6, lign7}, [R__4, R__2, R__3, R__C, R, C, V__i]);

Here's a picture as well:

However, the solution is simply that V_i = 0 and C=0, which is not really helping me. Am I doing something wrong here or is my system of equalities simply unsolvabe?

 

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Last Page 4 of 1695