## 60 Reputation

15 years, 315 days

## My mistake...

I've just noticed that the answer to an Equation question must be specified in the form "y=..." in order for any rearrangement of it to be graded correct, so this is no longer a problem.

## That sounds like what I had...

That sounds like what I had in mind, but when it comes to actually insering the * symbols, it doesn't seem like there's an easy way to identify where they are implied. I think I'm going to just leave this questions for a while! One related problem which I've just noticed is with the Equation question type. I'm using this to ask for the equation of a straight line, given two points on it. I always specify the correct answer in the form ax+by+c=0 with a,b,c integers, but I was under the impression that any rearrangement of that should be graded as correct (e.g. when I put the equation in the form y=mx+c it's always been marked correct). However, it seems that not all rearrangements are marked correct, e.g. Your Answer: 2y=3+x Correct Answer: x-2*y+3 = 0 It seems that putting the equation in the form by=c-ax isn't recognised. I hope this is just a bug, as the Equation type is otherwise very useful.

Thanks for the response. I've tested that code and it works in the question I had already written (I was a bit unsure about the <> in your procedure as I've had some trouble with that and the LaTeX convertor before!) I still have big reservations about requiring Maple syntax though. This question is part of a test for incoming undergraduates, who won't have had any experience with Maple, so we want the grading to be as flexible as possible - particularly since there are other questions in the test which don't require Maple syntax. Is there any way we could work on the $RESPONSE in the grading code, to insert any missing multiplications? That would allow them to enter 2x^2 but then be graded on 2*x^2. Lastly, I have two suggestions for a future version of Maple TA: 1. add variations of "type=formula" to allow for equations, or lists of equations (e.g. parametric equations, where they may answer "x=2t,y=3t") 2. add a new question type for algebraic equations. This could just be the existing Equation type, with a flag like "type=algebraic". The idea here would be to use the more sophisticated grading that you posted above, but without the need for that code to be inserted every time in the LaTeX/QU file. ## Using LaTeX... Hi, If you're using the LaTeX authoring method, you can do \begin{question}{Matrix} for a question type which is designed for this use. Search for "matrix in latex" in the Maple TA help, and you'll get some explanation and the following example code: \begin{question}{Matrix} \qutext{Find the transpose of the matrix $$A=\left[\begin{array}{ccc} 1 & 2 & 3\\ 0 & 1 & -2\end{array}\right]$$} % Specify the number of rows of the answer, and then the number of columns. \size{3}{2} % Use a comma-separated list, starting with the first row: \answer{1, 0, 2, 1, 3, -2} % The answer is formatted for readability, but this is not required. \end{question} Good luck! ## More MathML woes... As I understand it, Maple TA's own mathml command should only be used for really simple chunks of output. However, you don't get much simpler than this:$out1=mathml("-x"); $out2=mathml("-x+1");$out3=mathml("1-x"); Am I missing something obvious here?

Thanks for the reply. I had considered just displaying the plain text, but it's not ideal as that example is going to be one of 6 sequences put out in a multiple selection question, and the other choices will need to be set in MathML since they contain fractions and symbols. What I really can't get my head around is that the rendering is different for exactly the same code. It does seem important that you use exactly maple("printf(MathML:-ExportPresentation( - any variation seems to break it. I've got sommething to say about the topic you linked to, but I'll just post it there.

## Further example......

Here's further odd behaviour: $O1=maple("printf( MathML:-ExportPresentation( cos(x) ))");$O2=maple("printf(MathML:-ExportPresentation( cos(x) ))"); The only difference in the code there is that O1 has a space before the MathML command. Surely that shouldn't affect the rendering?

## Thanks. Do you know when...

Thanks. Do you know when Maple TA 4.0 is due for release?

## That was my first thought...

That was my first thought too, but it turns out that our Maple TA is using Maple 11 (build 277223) which is the same as the desktop version of Maple I used for the second plot. Maple TA itself is "Maple T.A. 3.01 Build Date: Nov 30, 09:39 AM (EST)". The only difference is that I'm using Windows whereas the server is using Linux.
 Page 1 of 1
﻿