@ogunmiloro How precisely is that latest attachment different from the original? It looks as if you have accidentallu uploaded the original file again, unchanged.

The proc wrapper approach can work with an `add` call. That can make sense directly.

The `Sum` call conversion can make some sense with an implicit `evalf` acting. (I'm not a huge fan of that kind of thing.)

I don't see why that call to Maple's inert symbolic Sum should translate to that Matlab sum call. They don't directly do the same computation.

@ogunmiloro I have doubts about the correctness of what you write.

You should correct the formulas in a revised worksheet and attach it as followup.

I don't think that it should take four or five postings for you to ask your question with the details present and correct.

@ogunmiloro 

What do you mean by the numerator GAMMA in the terms like

   GAMMA/GAMMA(tau+1)

?

@ogunmiloro Apart from your statement that you want 2D contour plots, I don't see how your latest response answers my questions.

Your sheet already mentioned that tau ranges from 0.2 to 1.0 in query (2). There's no merit in your repeating that. But you still haven't told use what value gamma[1] should take for that plot.

Your sheet already mentioned that gamma[1] ranges from 0.2 to 1.0 in query (3). There's no merit in your repeating that. But you still haven't told use what value tau should take for that plot.

What do you mean by  GAMMA/GAMMA(tau+1)  ?

You have GAMMA used in function calls (ok), but also as a standalone name. What is the numerator supposed to mean, for example in this subexpression:

   GAMMA/GAMMA(tau+1)

?

Also, all three cases's descriptions are incomplete, since numeric values for the remaining parameters are not specified. In case (1) what are values for tau and gamma[1]? In case (2) what is the value of gamma[1]? In case (3) what is the value of tau?

You have also failed to mention what kinds of plots you want? 2D contour plots? 3D contour plots? Something else?

Yes, it's been broken for a few days now.

The flag mechanism also seems broken. Tag deletion also seems broken.

@Ali2020 How does your followup comment's code produce the original target,

    [-12,-23,-34,87,18,98,27,93,45,68 ]

@Kitonum You suggested  [seq(rhs~(t)[],t=[a])]  but that produces an incorrect result.

a := {x = -12, y = -23}, {x = -34, y = 87},
     {x = 18, y = 98}, {x = 27, y = 93},
     {x = 45, y = 68}:

[seq(rhs~(t)[],t=[a])];

     [-23, -12, -34, 87, 18, 98, 27, 93, 45, 68]

Here's one possible correction,

[seq(rhs~([t[]])[],t=[a])];

     [-12, -23, -34, 87, 18, 98, 27, 93, 45, 68]

This approach does not generalize so conveniently to modified requests like y,x ordering, etc.

@mmcdara I'll add more later, but for now I'll mention that Embedded Components can work in the Maple Cloud (ie. via web browser) as well as the free MaplePlayer. Maplets can do neither of those. 

@mmcdara When Embedded Components were first introduced they could only be manually inserted from the palette.

That made developing involved interactive applications more difficult, since (months later, etc) the author would have to crack open their Properties and Action code using the mouse, to make amendments. The need to nest GUI Tables (in order to get nice layout) with hidden borders, and the difficulties of adjusting that by right-clicks, made complicated applications much harder.

For example, I had a tough time writing this application using only right-click for amendments.

But in modern Maple one can embed Components programmatically using DocumentTools:-InsertContent, and one can construct their code programmatically using DocumentTools:-Components and DocumentTools:-Layout. This makes involved application development much easier, and the programmatic construction code can reside in plaintext .mpl files, be revision controlled, etc.

ps. There is a very short interactive least-squares/plotter application on the Help page for the Plot Component programmatic constructor. Building and embedding it requires no right-click or palette mouse effort.

@mmcdara Your worksheet contains no Embedded Components, which is why your calls cannot get or set any values of properties of any Embedded Components.

I attach a revised worksheet in which I have added a single Plot Component from the Components palette. I right-clicked on it and set its identity (name) from Plot0 to Plot1.

Your other attampt at calling DocumentTools:-Do refers to Components with other identities, which is why it doesn't work. I am guessing that you are trying to run Examples from the DocumentTools:-Do command's Help page in your Maple 2015. You seem to overlooked this key paragraph of instructions on that page, right below the call with(DocumentTools) in the Examples Section,

    Insert a Math Expression component and two Text Area components from
    the Components palette.  Change the name of each component to
    expression, from, and to respectively by editing the Name field in the component
    properties.  To display the component properties, right-click (Control-click for
    Macintosh) the component and select Component from the context menu.
    Save the changes and then enter an expression into the Math Expression
    component and integers into the two Text Area components accordingly.

DT-Do_ac.mw

I already showed (the day earlier) that simplify(evalc(...)) could be applied under assumptions to the indefinite integral and that the imaginary part could be thus removed exactly and entirely.

However, as also mentioned yesterday, this approach is inferior to purely numeric integration for the given example because there is additional roundoff error and even greater working precision is required in order to attain decent accuracy.

Using Re instead of up front conversion to exact rationals makes that numeric error effect even worse for this example, and working precision needs to be raised prior to the call to int.

Unfortunately, this is a relatively poor approach to the problem.

@vv Unfortunately that does not work in Maple 17.02. (That is part of the problem.)

But method=ftocms does.