restart;
with(plottools);
with(plots);
a := 1;
b := 1;
c := 1;
k := 1;
l := 1;
omega := 1;
A[2] = 2;
alpha := 2;
beta := 1;
kappa := 0.5;
C[1] := 1;
lambda := -1;

omega := (-alpha^6*b^4*lambda + 2*alpha^6*b^2*l^2 - 2*a^2*alpha^4*l^2 + 2*alpha^4*b^2*k^2 + a^4*alpha^2*lambda - 2*a^2*alpha^2*k^2 + 4*a*C[1])/(-4*alpha^2*b^2 + 4*a^2);

a[0] := 0;

a[1] := sqrt(-(-alpha^2*b^2 + a^2)/(4*beta))*alpha;

b[1] := sqrt(-(alpha^2*b^2*lambda*sigma - a^2*lambda*sigma)/(4*beta))*alpha;

sigma := A[1]*A[1] - A[2]*A[2];

T := A[1]*sinh(xi*sqrt(-lambda)) + A[2]*cosh(xi*sqrt(-lambda)) + mu/lambda;

t := diff(T, xi);

S := t/T;

R := 1/T;

mu := 0;

A[1] := 0;

y := 0;

xi := k*x^kappa/kappa + l*y^kappa/kappa - omega*t^kappa/kappa;

  Error, recursive assignment

Dear all,

I'm reporting what seems to me as a bug in the SMTLIB library in maple. 

    |\^/|     Maple 2026 (X86 64 LINUX)
._|\|   |/|_. Copyright (c) Maplesoft, a division of Waterloo Maple Inc. 2026
 \  MAPLE  /  All rights reserved. Maple is a trademark of
 <____ ____>  Waterloo Maple Inc.
      |       Type ? for help.
> SMTLIB:-Satisfiable({x^2=2,y^2=2,x<y});
                                     true

> SMTLIB:-Satisfiable({x^2=2,y^2=2,y<x});
                                     false

> SMTLIB:-Satisfiable({x^2=2,a^2=2,a<x});
                                     true

The Satisfiable command do not output the correct decision on two formulas of equivalent realization by switching x<y (output SAT) to y<x (output UNSAT). I suspect this is because some alphabetical order depandance in the variables as for a<y we get SAT again.

I tried to feed Z3 with the code given by ToString on the problematic formula and I get two different outputs :

• on the Z3 version 4.8.12 from the ubuntu repository (apt install) I also get the wrong UNSAT output;
• one the Z3 version 4.17.0 build from the official github repository I finally get the correct SAT output.

Thus, I suspect a version problem in SMTLIB that do not take in account the last updates made in SMT solvers (Z3?).

Many thanks for considering my problem!

A little while ago, I created a video, Engaging and Enlightening Students with Maple Visualizations, that showed a sample of Maple visualizations that would be helpful in teaching math. Doing that allowed me to get reacquainted with some of Maple's plotting features that I hadn't used for a while. As a result, I made a second instructional video for my Maple tips series, Animating a Polyhedron in Maple. 

I chose this topic because I thought it would show several features in Maple that might not be known to all users. I list them below and encourage you to try them out.

• The plots:-polyhedraplot command allows you to create a 3-D plot of a polyhedron, including one of 138 polyhedra that Maple knows about.

• The list of named polyhedra available can be obtained by calling the plots:-polyhedra_supported command.

• The viewpoint option, which allows you to create an animation by varying the viewpoint through a 3D plot, can be used to rotate the polyhedron.

• Finally, the Export feature allows you to save the plot animation as an animated GIF.

restart;
solve({-alpha^4*b^2*lambda*mu*b[1] + a^2*alpha^2*lambda*mu*b[1] + 6*beta*lambda^2*sigma*a[0]*a[1]^2 + 6*beta*mu^2*a[0]*a[1]^2 - 6*beta*lambda*a[0]*b[1]^2 = 0, -alpha^4*b^2*lambda^2*mu*sigma - alpha^4*b^2*mu^3 + a^2*alpha^2*lambda^2*mu*sigma + a^2*alpha^2*mu^3 - 4*beta*lambda^2*sigma*a[0]*b[1] - 4*beta*lambda*mu*b[1]^2 - 4*beta*mu^2*a[0]*b[1] = 0, -alpha^4*b^2*lambda^2*sigma - alpha^4*b^2*mu^2 + a^2*alpha^2*lambda^2*sigma + a^2*alpha^2*mu^2 + beta*lambda^2*sigma*a[1]^2 + beta*mu^2*a[1]^2 - 3*beta*lambda*b[1]^2 = 0, -alpha^4*b^2*lambda^2*sigma - alpha^4*b^2*mu^2 + a^2*alpha^2*lambda^2*sigma + a^2*alpha^2*mu^2 + 3*beta*lambda^2*sigma*a[1]^2 + 3*beta*mu^2*a[1]^2 - beta*lambda*b[1]^2 = 0, -alpha^6*b^4*lambda^2*mu*b[1] + alpha^6*b^2*l^2*lambda^2*sigma*a[0] + alpha^6*b^2*l^2*mu^2*a[0] - a^2*alpha^4*l^2*lambda^2*sigma*a[0] + alpha^4*b^2*k^2*lambda^2*sigma*a[0] - a^2*alpha^4*l^2*mu^2*a[0] + alpha^4*b^2*k^2*mu^2*a[0] + 2*alpha^2*b^2*beta*lambda^2*sigma*a[0]^3 + a^4*alpha^2*lambda^2*mu*b[1] - a^2*alpha^2*k^2*lambda^2*sigma*a[0] - 6*alpha^2*b^2*beta*lambda^2*a[0]*b[1]^2 + 2*alpha^2*b^2*beta*mu^2*a[0]^3 - a^2*alpha^2*k^2*mu^2*a[0] + 2*a^2*beta*lambda^2*sigma*a[0]^3 + 2*alpha^2*b^2*lambda^2*omega*sigma*a[0] - 6*a^2*beta*lambda^2*a[0]*b[1]^2 + 2*a^2*beta*mu^2*a[0]^3 + 2*alpha^2*b^2*mu^2*omega*a[0] - 2*a^2*lambda^2*omega*sigma*a[0] - 2*a^2*mu^2*omega*a[0] + 2*a*lambda^2*sigma*C[1]*a[0] + 2*a*mu^2*C[1]*a[0] = 0, -2*alpha^6*b^4*lambda^3*sigma - 2*alpha^6*b^4*lambda*mu^2 + alpha^6*b^2*l^2*lambda^2*sigma + alpha^6*b^2*l^2*mu^2 - a^2*alpha^4*l^2*lambda^2*sigma + alpha^4*b^2*k^2*lambda^2*sigma + 2*a^4*alpha^2*lambda^3*sigma - a^2*alpha^4*l^2*mu^2 + alpha^4*b^2*k^2*mu^2 + 6*alpha^2*b^2*beta*lambda^2*sigma*a[0]^2 + 2*a^4*alpha^2*lambda*mu^2 - a^2*alpha^2*k^2*lambda^2*sigma - 6*alpha^2*b^2*beta*lambda^2*b[1]^2 + 6*alpha^2*b^2*beta*mu^2*a[0]^2 - a^2*alpha^2*k^2*mu^2 + 6*a^2*beta*lambda^2*sigma*a[0]^2 + 2*alpha^2*b^2*lambda^2*omega*sigma - 6*a^2*beta*lambda^2*b[1]^2 + 6*a^2*beta*mu^2*a[0]^2 + 2*alpha^2*b^2*mu^2*omega - 2*a^2*lambda^2*omega*sigma - 2*a^2*mu^2*omega + 2*a*lambda^2*sigma*C[1] + 2*a*mu^2*C[1] = 0, -alpha^6*b^4*lambda^3*sigma + alpha^6*b^4*lambda*mu^2 + alpha^6*b^2*l^2*lambda^2*sigma + alpha^6*b^2*l^2*mu^2 - a^2*alpha^4*l^2*lambda^2*sigma + alpha^4*b^2*k^2*lambda^2*sigma + a^4*alpha^2*lambda^3*sigma - a^2*alpha^4*l^2*mu^2 + alpha^4*b^2*k^2*mu^2 + 6*alpha^2*b^2*beta*lambda^2*sigma*a[0]^2 - a^4*alpha^2*lambda*mu^2 - a^2*alpha^2*k^2*lambda^2*sigma - 2*alpha^2*b^2*beta*lambda^2*b[1]^2 + 12*alpha^2*b^2*beta*lambda*mu*a[0]*b[1] + 6*alpha^2*b^2*beta*mu^2*a[0]^2 - a^2*alpha^2*k^2*mu^2 + 6*a^2*beta*lambda^2*sigma*a[0]^2 + 2*alpha^2*b^2*lambda^2*omega*sigma - 2*a^2*beta*lambda^2*b[1]^2 + 12*a^2*beta*lambda*mu*a[0]*b[1] + 6*a^2*beta*mu^2*a[0]^2 + 2*alpha^2*b^2*mu^2*omega - 2*a^2*lambda^2*omega*sigma - 2*a^2*mu^2*omega + 2*a*lambda^2*sigma*C[1] + 2*a*mu^2*C[1] = 0}, {omega, a[0], a[1], b[1]});
 

Main worksheet [not all is displayed below]:

Download RootAnalysis4.mw

Any explanation why this happens? notice, I did not supply the x and y ranges, let Maple decide.

Download bug_in_contourplot.mw

nowday i am very intrested in this method which really i something intresting  i want to generate all the type of function not just thus in this paper  i will update the other  layers too but need sometime, i try to apply the exact layer  as author did in this paper but i did something mistake in one part about finding the parameters  i didnt fix that part but i did the second  part of the paper and i got answer, but for first one i need some help, also if possible  it will be amazing if someone can construct the all layer which can be construct , this is just two cases i provide here and in one of them i am stuck and i can't find the parameter but other i did it , target  of finding in apply the formula  for more  hiden layer  becuase in other papers i saw a lot of the  hiden layer i want to apply all of them if possible not jsut tw or three of them i want to know  and see how many hiden layer exist by constructing generate function, and the graph i am not sure maple can do that or not like fig 1 and fig 2 which if do that it will  be more amazing 

thank you for any help 

t1 have problem about  first case of layer and t2 dont have problem

I asked Maple AI what a glyph is. Then I prompted this

A kernel lost message was returned and the AI pannel became irresponsive.

Maple is still running well in exsisting and new tabs. 

Can the AI service be restarted from the user interface?

(Is that crash reproducible?)

Edit:

For exercises involving Pick's Theorem, I need grid points within a Cartesian coordinate system. How can "all" grid points - at least within the first quadrant - be generated without the tedious manual entry of integer coordinates? Is it possible to draw grid polygons as closed polylines simply by clicking on the grid points? (BTW: At the moment, this works well in the good old "Cabri.")
My search within the "Help" section (using terms such as plot, grid, mesh, lattice, etc.) proved unsuccessful.

The HTML characters in the attached document cause problems here on MaplePrimes. You have to open the worksheet

Download HTML_characters_in_math_mode.mw

05-2-2.mws

Can you help me with this code?

Download 05-2-2.mws

Can anyone share additional information about the Maple conference to be held in 2026? I want to submit a talk and then submit a paper to the Maple Transactions journal based on the same.

Can anyone help me?

Download 09-1-1.mws

I am trying to plot a function where one of the variables is determind via a procedure that uses fsolve and depends on some parameters. When I go to try and make a plot using Explore to vary the parameters I get the following error:
"in fsolve  S  is in the equation, and is not solved for"
My worksheet is seen below:

When I try to move the sliders on my parameters this is where I get the error. I want to plot over S, but I can only get CC once I have all the other values including S. I assume it has something to do with the fact that my plotting variable is in the procedure?

Any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks. 

Download Explore_Plot_Problem.mw

A note on what I've been working on for the past while. Some of you may have seen the announcement on LinkedIn yesterday; this is for the home audience.

The question I've been chasing is the one that's underneath the Physics package, the dsolve / pdsolve formal methods and heuristics, the advanced Mathematical Functions and FunctionAdvisor, and most of what I've written for Maple over the years. How can mathematicians and physicists speed up significantly their work using Computer Algebra Systems (CAS) and at the same time trust the result a computer hands back? The new chapter is what happens when AI sits between the human and the CAS, and the answer to that, in my view, turns out to be a much harder problem than the AI hype suggests.

Why? Because AI is increasingly the driver of computational mathematics in research, engineering, and education. And the unsolved problem isn't whether AI can do mathematics. It can. The problem is that an incorrect AI result arrives with the same confidence as a correct one.

On 100 challenging problems of undergraduate mathematics we tested, six independent state-of-the-art AIs returned mathematically equivalent answers on only 21% of them, and even within a single AI, repeated runs disagreed with themselves on 3% to 57% of the problems (details). The gap this validation crosses, between probabilistic inference and certified mathematical computation, is epistemological, not technological. It won't close with more training data. It needs validation across multiple AIs and multiple CAS, with no single engine having the final word.

ExaktAI aims to address that gap. It guides AI through mathematical computation, validates each step against Maple and Mathematica, and automatically generates and opens a corresponding CAS document where the validation can be audited and reproduced for every step, and where one can continue working on the problem. The goal: AI-mathematics that is validated, with the human in the loop.

ExaktAI is now well developed (TRL 6: System prototype demonstration in a simulated environment, on the ISED / Innovative Solutions Canada TRL scale). At the end an image. A Beta is scheduled for late summer / fall 2026; details at exaktai.ai.

In summary: ExaktAI is my present, and if you work on AI for mathematics and computer algebra, or the validation problem for AI, I'd love to hear your perspective.



Edgardo S. Cheb-Terrab
ExaktAI
Research Fellow Emeritus at Maplesoft.