ticalc.org
Basics Archives Community Services Programming
Hardware Help About Search Your Account
   Home :: Archives :: News :: Symbolic v1.2 [v1.4] for TI-83+

Symbolic v1.2 [v1.4] for TI-83+
Posted by Eric on 17 December 2001, 05:44 GMT

Brandon Sterner of Detached Solutions has released his newest program, Symbolic v1.0 (v1.1 and v1.2 have since been released) for the TI-83+. This is a rather exciting program that allows users to symbolically differentiate and simplify algebraic expressions, functions that previously were reserved only for the TI-89/92/92+. Many other useful features are also included. Check out the Symbolic homepage for more information. It's always great to see people work on math-related programs...let's hope it continues.

Update (Eric): Symbolic v1.4 has now been released.

 


The comments below are written by ticalc.org visitors. Their views are not necessarily those of ticalc.org, and ticalc.org takes no responsibility for their content.


Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
Spiral  Account Info

Looks interesting, too bad i already have an 89, but i might as well try it out. I'm glad people are developing apps. on to graphlink then i need something constructive...
this is MY first comment (i think) :)

     17 December 2001, 06:01 GMT


Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
no_one_2000_  Account Info

Hey, you got first comment!

Boy, am I so depressed. I spent a whole hour trying to make an assembly program. (I'm learning assembly). It's for the 82. I was trying to display a sprite, and then move it with the arrow keys, but it won't move. :( Sigh.

#include "TI82.H"
#include "KEYS.INC"

.ORG START_ADDR
.DB "no_one_2000 is sad.",0

ROM_CALL(CLEARLCD)
LD HL,0
LD (CURSOR_POS),HL
LD HL,Mean
ROM_CALL(D_ZT_STR)
WaitBLAH:
CALL GET_KEY
CP G_ENTER
JR NZ,WaitBLAH
RET
Mean:
.DB "Assembly is mean.",0

.END

     19 December 2001, 02:11 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
Cullen Logan  Account Info
(Web Page)

hey there are plenty of sprite tutorials on the web! Anyhow you really don't have a sprite anywhere in that code. A sprite is generally represented by binary numbers. What you have is soem text. A sprite could look something like this:

Sprite:
.db %11111111
.db %10000001
.db %10000001
.db %10000001
.db %10000001
.db %10000001
.db %10000001
.db %11111111


that is a box...the ones correspond to a pixel being on or black.

     19 December 2001, 04:50 GMT

Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
Gabe Durazo  Account Info
(Web Page)

Hmm... that looks hard. I've been programming a lot in Basic, but i've been wanting to move on now for awhile. So, is assembly that much better than C? I knew C a couple years ago but forgot... C sure is easier than assembly though... is the speed gains from assembly worth it? Thanks.. I know it's off topic but i can't find forums anywhere here.

Now on topic: I think it's great also, that finally the TI-83+ math functions are improving. I'd have downloaded it all in a second if I didn't *just* get and 89... sigh. Maybe I still will.

     19 December 2001, 06:41 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
Cullen Logan  Account Info
(Web Page)

Assembly can seem intimidating at first but it really is not that bad. In many regards it is better from a programmers point of view because he/she is allowed to tell the processor exactly what to do without a wrapper of any sort. I definately think you should take the time and find some tutorials....there are plenty on the web you just need to look.

     19 December 2001, 16:57 GMT

Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
Tijl Coosemans Account Info
(Web Page)

Dah, that code was obviously meant to be a joke... ;-)

     20 December 2001, 16:37 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
no_one_2000_  Account Info

Yeah, I'm not really that good with Assembly. :( I know Javascript, Java (somewhat), and a few other things, but this is so different. I guess having only about 8 registers is a bit intimidating.

     20 December 2001, 22:21 GMT

Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
no_one_2000_  Account Info

Oh, that's not my program. If you want to see my program, I'll e-mail it to you. It doesn't lock up or anything, it just won't move. You use CLEAR to exit.

     20 December 2001, 22:19 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
no_one_2000_  Account Info

There's really a lot of tutorials on the web? The only one I could find was karma.ticalc.org (which is pretty good).

     20 December 2001, 22:25 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
lord_nightrose Account Info
(Web Page)

TI-89 assembly:
http://basil.cs.uwp.edu/ Documentation/bsvc/68kasm/
http://www.technoplaza.net/ assembly/index.cgi?p=68kmain
http://www.technoplaza.net/assembly/

I don't know about any others... didn't look.

     21 December 2001, 01:19 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
no_one_2000_  Account Info

I don't have an 89. How about an 82? Anyone know any good sites for the 82?

     21 December 2001, 01:28 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
no_one_2000_  Account Info

Whoa! Last week that was true...

But I got one for Christmas! Oh yeah, oh yeah, oh, oh, oh yeah.

     30 December 2001, 21:37 GMT

Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
JoelThePenguin  Account Info

w00t! I'll give it a try. I downloaded the latest TiLP, does FLASH for the 83+ work yet? I guess I'll find out.

     17 December 2001, 06:09 GMT

Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
JoelThePenguin  Account Info

Nope...

     17 December 2001, 06:13 GMT


Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
no_one_2000_  Account Info

w00t

     20 December 2001, 22:27 GMT

Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
Emir Sakic  Account Info
(Web Page)

Great job!

Nice that someone cares about the calculator's main purpose.

Simplify and differentiate will probably be most useful.

     17 December 2001, 06:37 GMT


Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
Samir Ribic  Account Info
(Web Page)

Somewhere on Internet is available source code of MuMath.

This means that some future versions of Symbolic can have also integration, and diferential equations.

     17 December 2001, 11:53 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
rgdtad  Account Info

Try www.MuPad.de and go to the developers' page. Last I heard, the source to MuPad (the best free CAS I have been able to find) was a free download, but once you have symbolic differentiation working, it should be a fairly trivial thing to add symbolic integration. All you really need to do, if he did it the way I think he did, is replace the differentiation rules with integration rules.

     17 December 2001, 14:46 GMT

Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
Brandon Sterner  Account Info
(Web Page)

I do not think integration would be that easy. If normal problems encountered in a second level calculus class require much algebraic manipulation to be able to integrate something. I used recursion and binary trees for differentiation and simplification. I will take a look at the source but I can't seem to find the source on the web site itself. Do you have a link? Maybe I should email the developer address.

     17 December 2001, 19:25 GMT

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
Gergely Patai  Account Info

I'm actually developing symbolic differentiation for the 83 (I'm just very slow...). However, I chose a simple, non-recursive method, because I'm not sure whether or not the stack would be enough. Currently I'm sort of sucking with the parser...

     17 December 2001, 19:49 GMT

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
Brandon Sterner  Account Info
(Web Page)

there seem to be a few ways of doing this but they all rely on stacks, you could simulate a stack(maybe just add on the op or fp stacks). What i did was i relocated the stack into free ram. this let the stack grow much larger than the 400 allocated for hardware stack. First i opened up an edibuffer then set the stack to the last byte of the edit buffer. then my binary tree up and my stack grew down in memory. when these two got danerously close the memory error was thrown.

     17 December 2001, 20:17 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
DasBoot  Account Info

webMathematica's Integrator http://integrals.wolfram.com/
takes about 500 pages of Mathematica code and 600 pages of C code, so it won't be that easy...

     18 December 2001, 18:43 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
Gergely Patai  Account Info

That's why I'm doing differentiation, not integration. :)

     18 December 2001, 18:55 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
rgdtad  Account Info

I am sorry, I did not fully understand how you implemented the differentiation. I thought it was just a table driven kind of thing where you take the expression, find the outermost operator, and apply the rule regarding it. I think that this is how HP got that nifty step-by-step calculus stuff. It is a _lot_ easier to make this kind in RPN, though.

For the most part, integrals I encounter are about the same complexity of differentiating, just in reverse and a little wierder thanks to the complexities of that little "C" in them. In my room, right now, I have 2 little plastic sheets with the diff. and integ. rules on them, and these have worked for about 98% of the integrals I have needed to solve, and all of the derivatives.

     17 December 2001, 20:34 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
Gergely Patai  Account Info

For a starter, try to integrate sin(x^2) and x^x. And let's see what you come up with. :)

     17 December 2001, 20:50 GMT

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
Robert Mohr  Account Info
(Web Page)

2*x*cos(x^2)
and
(ln(x)+1)*x^x

     20 December 2001, 00:55 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
Robert Mohr  Account Info
(Web Page)

Wait, that'd be the differentiation.
Those are hard to do.

     20 December 2001, 01:08 GMT


Symbolic
ylm63

x^3 x^5 x^7
sin(x) = x - ----- + ----- - ----- + ... ...
3! 5! 7!

thus:

x^6 x^10 x^14
sin(x^2) = x^2 - ----- + ------ - ------ + ... ...
3! 5! 7!

and:

x^3 x^7 x^11 x^15
Integrate( sin(x^2)dx ) = ----- - ----- + ------ - ------ + ... ...
1!3 3!7 5!11 7!15

infinity | x^(4n-1) |
= SUM | (-1)^(n-1) * --------------- |
n = 1 | (2n-1)!(4n-1) |

...and i'm only a junior...

if you don't believe me try the following on your calcs (if you use an 86):

fnInt(sin(x^2), x,0,3.1415926535898/2) ----------------------- (1)
sum seq((-1)^(x-1)* (3.1415926535898/2) ^(4x-1)/(2n-1)!/(4n-1),x,1,10) ---- (2)

They should give almost the same number :)
Technically, you should substitute 0 for (3.1415926535898/2) in (2) and subtract it from (2) as well, but it is just 0.

(Don't know why the 89s and the 92+s don't give this value - i guess its still better to think about a problem first before plugging it into the calc)

As for the x^x I don't think there is an integral

     1 January 2002, 20:24 GMT


Re: Symbolic
PKA

Speaking of 86's, why doesn't somebody make a symbolic like program for the 86 (although I think there is a program called cas86 in the basic archives of ti86 math programs but i don't know how it works or what it does).

     7 November 2002, 15:58 GMT

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
lalu

Is it even *possible* to do the x^x ? Well, sure, you could define a new special function, but that's not what I mean.

     20 December 2001, 04:03 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
Matt Bagby  Account Info

isn't that integration by parts?

     6 May 2002, 01:12 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
Gergely Patai  Account Info

As my former maths teacher said: "Differentiation is for children at the kindergarten. Integration is an art."

Unfortunately there are no "integration rules", it's a rather intuitive process, where lots of individual cases should be separately programmed, and such a program simply cannot be fit on those Z80 calcs - only if we restrict it to simple cases.

     17 December 2001, 19:44 GMT

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
lalu

Oh yes, there is an algorithm (actually, several) for symbolic integration. For example, look up Rothstein-Trager or Risch integration. There is also a method called Horowitz reduction that helps with integration. All of this should be in any basic computer algebra text.

     18 December 2001, 03:32 GMT

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
Samir Ribic  Account Info
(Web Page)

When I mentioned MuMath, it was written for CP/M, so it was designed for Z80 computers.
It was written by the same software house as Derive and TI89 ROM.

You can download it on link above




     18 December 2001, 13:47 GMT

From another point of view
pompousjerk

The problem is, of course, that TI-calculators, wonderful though they are, are entirely stupid.

Integration, as you said, is not really rule-based; the problem is a general intelligence one, and it is IMPOSSIBLE to code a good general intelligence (see: http://singinst.org/GISAI, or the whole damn site for that matter, as well as its 'partner' http://sysopmind.com/) on a computer that only do < 10^15 flops. Idiots-savants are not able to integrate like you or me, because their prowess is in an incredibly small domain, like a computer's.

It might be possible to hack up an integration feature, but it would be slower than molasses in the middle of an antarctic winter on Pluto, and would screw up a lot.

     19 December 2001, 02:37 GMT


Re: From another point of view
pompousjerk

>> The problem is, of course, that TI-calculators, wonderful though they are, are entirely stupid.

Ack! Revising my kludge-mode writing...

TI-Calculators are dumb.
Integration is mostly an intellectual process which cannot be done by simple rules.
Intelligence requires a computer with power near that of a human brain.

For more information on AI, visit http://singinst.org/GISAI or sysopmind.com

     19 December 2001, 02:50 GMT


Re: Re: From another point of view
lalu

<<Integration is mostly an intellectual process which cannot be done by simple rules.
Intelligence requires a computer with power near that of a human brain.>>

If that is correct, then the TI-89 is one such computer.

     19 December 2001, 03:13 GMT

Re: Re: Re: From another point of view
Gergely Patai  Account Info

NO, because it cannot do integration in general, only some specific cases. Try those two ones I mentioned a bit above, and you'll see. A human can integrate ANYTHING in theory, given the knowledge and enough time. However, no matter how much time you give to a computer, it won't be able to do that.

     19 December 2001, 08:38 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: From another point of view
Samir Ribic  Account Info
(Web Page)

Yes, if the human introduces new functions for every integral he can not solve.

And there are many of them. The most famous are

Integral (sin(x)/x) dx
Integral (e^(-x^2)) dx


Anyway, on my postgraduate studies, my thesis for artificial inteligence course was about algebra calculators like TI89.

The symbolic integration, chess, and the most of other "artificial inteligence" miracles is actually method "try several ways and select the most appropriate", with many optimisations.

The human thinking method is "by analogy". When I remark that I have to integrate function that is rational function of sines and cosines, my experience tells me that I need to introduce replacement sin x=t,
cos x dx=dt.

     19 December 2001, 18:44 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: From another point of view
Gergely Patai  Account Info

"Yes, if the human introduces new functions for every integral he can not solve."

And now we have named the most important feature of humans that distinguishes them from calculators. :)

     20 December 2001, 20:45 GMT


Re: Re: Re: From another point of view
Achorny  Account Info

Err, that is one of the most obsurd things ever uttered by someone who doesn't know what they are talking about. To put it in terms comparing it to the computer processor, the brain functions at about 3.8 THz, that's right *tera*hertz, and can store about 32TB, *tera*bytes, of info. Of course, it isn't really in binary or anything, so this isn't that acurate, but it does give a fairly cool comparison.

     1 January 2002, 23:07 GMT


Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Symbolic v1.2 for TI-83+
GavinO  Account Info
(Web Page)

Any math operation can be broken up into a process that the calc can understand. What makes it seem like an art is not telling the program about the bits you use. FOr example, having a calculator play chess may at first seem complicated, and only handled case-by-case, until you realize that the way a computer handles data needs to be changed to make it integrate (yukyuk) with chess. You need to include checking, jumping, special moves, promotion, in addition to things such as bishops move diagonally and rooks move linearly. THings aren't special-case, just underutilized :)

     20 December 2001, 04:09 GMT

1  2  3  4  

You can change the number of comments per page in Account Preferences.

  Copyright © 1996-2011, the ticalc.org project. All rights reserved. | Contact Us | Disclaimer