Here are a few ways to get a list (of lists) instead of your
set (of lists).
 

Download convert_set_list.mw

Do you mean like this?

tagsCornersPlot :=textplot3d([seq([seq(cornerPoints[1..dim,i]),cornerPoints[1..dim,i]],i=1..4)],
                                               align = {above, right}, font = [Courier, bold, 20]);

You wrote, "Also I was not able to suppress the display of the odesteps on the terminal even though they do not display in worksheet, they still print in the terminal. But this is a side issue.

Why does Latex gives error in command line?"

It's not a side-issue; those two aspects are related. Your ODESteps call is returning NULL in the commandline interface case, and displaying the plaintext as a printing side-effect.

Try this instead, in the commandline.

   the_output:=Student:-ODEs:-ODESteps(ode,y(x),output=typeset):

That should force the same output as you get in the GUI, ie. a blob of typesetting stuff, which latex can deal with. You might also try output=print.

Not all these optional parameters to ODESteps are currently documented, but several of them can be figured out:

showstat(Student:-ODEs:-ODESteps,1);

Student:-ODEs:-ODESteps := proc(ODE0, yx0, {animated::truefalse := false, displaystyle::identical(columns,compact,linear,default) := default, output::identical(print,printf,typeset,canvas,script,list,record,`module`,
  nomodule,default,solution,maple,link) := default})

In the commandline interface the default for output seems to behave just like output=printf, while in the GUI the default seems more like output=print or output=typeset. (I'd guess that canvas might be for MapleLearn...)

You can't assign to the name AngleA inside the procedure triangle of which its a parameter (and has been passed a value).

You could use a local to take on the new value.

You could re-use an existing local, and change,

    AngleA := rad(AngleA_calc);

to,

   AngleA_calc := rad(AngleA_calc);

(and correct the subsequent references to the assigned name) since the procedure doesn't use the pre-rad value any more. Or you could use another local.

And similarly for AngleB,AngleC.

ps. It's inefficient to have procedure triangle redefine procedures rad and deg each time triangle is called. If you want to improve that situation without assigning that pair at the top-level then you could make triangle be an appliable module and have deg and rad be locals of that module. Another approach would be to give such a (global) pair option inline, and keep you code tidier but without the extra overhead.

Let me know if you'd like to all this done, and I'll try and find a moment to edit this Reply (inplace). Do you have an example input you'd like to use?

This is just to address your a) and b).

Your phrasing in a) isn't clear about whether you're interested in any 3rd element being zero (including multiple instances of that), versus exactly one 3rd element being zero. I supposed the former, since you didn't state how the followup indices would be formed in the latter case.

pt := [<1, 1, 1>, <2, 1, 1>, <3, 1, 0>, <4, 1, 1>]:

for i to nops(pt) do if pt[i][3]=0 then break; end; end;
[$i..nops(pt), $1..i-1];

     [3, 4, 1, 2]

You could start by issuing

    kernelopts(numcpus=1):

at the start of your session. (See ?kernelopts)

ps. Being thread-safe is not the same as being deterministic. Neither causes the other in general. (Of course a particular program can easily have one depend on the other -- either way -- but that's certainly not the same as general causation. It's just happenstance and can link any two qualities.)

It's not clear whether you want an animation of a static plot. It's not clear to me whether you want a surface or 3d point-plot, as result.

So I guessed.

Download 2d_to_3d_try_ac.mw

The do-loop to solve and compute the Matrices M[k] (for the k values of Gr) takes 3 seconds on my Maple 2018.2. I also used spacestep=1e-2.

Download Demo_paper_work_1_accc.mw

The first one can be done because simplify can handle the rhs-lhs if n is assumed posint.

Download fibo_JAMET_1.mw

I haven't found a way to get zero from rhs-lhs of your G formula.

The answer seems to be due to the difference between applying eval versus limit for the IC.

This is apparently the same behaviour from odetest -- and certainly the same kind of example -- as in this older Question of yours from April 2024. And IIRC you posted another duplicate of that just the other week (though perhaps since deleted).

Download lim_eval.mw

@Andiguys This is to respond to your last Reply immediately above. I had a look at this last night, using Maple 2019 like you.

This seems to attain a minimum for TRC(sigma,nu,Q3).

N1_11_ac1.mw

Note that your ensuing plot3d call is confusing, since its first argument is an expression that does not contain I1 or I2. So it's unclear how you want to use any optimal values of sigma,nu,Q3. (I still don't think that you've made your full purpose clear, as previously mentioned.)

ps. I also tried to confirm the minimum using DirectSearch (from maple.cloud or the Application Center). For only Optimization:-Minimize I did some preliminary analysis to restrict the parameter ranges. The results seem to agree, though higher Digits was needed due I suppose to the difference in scale of Q3 versus sigma and mu.

Are you asking for a list of all the arguments to log calls in that input?

If so, note the additional ln terms introduced by Maple's evaluation of your input example. If you know that all your examples will be, say, polynomials of at least degree 1 in x then you might be able to get by with something like the first approach below. But more robust in general would be to use the inert %log when entering your input. (You described it as input.)

Download ln_indets.mw

There's no need to get into DataFrame complications here (eg. Tabulate of such renders row and column headers in 1D plaintext).

S5S4BoxPlotPondération_ac.mw

It's not entirely clear what you mean by "filtered" or "select". Do you want them returned in a new (smaller) DataFrame, or separated out from each other, or...?

Perhaps you want the result from,

    select(member,TestData,Case,SelectionList);

DataFrame_select_ex0.mw

I would prefer to transform a 2D version by transforming it onto the z=1 plane, instead of using intersectplot for a 3D version when it wasn't necessary.

display(transform((x,y)->[x,y,1])(plt1),
        scaling=constrained,caption="Projective Co-ords on plane z=1",
        axes=normal,axis[3]=[tickmarks=[1]]);

Having said that, I would also rather use a dedicated line-plotting command (line, or even plot with adaptive=false and numpoints=2) before I would call such a hammer as implicitplot for it.