[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Axiom-developer] Symbolic Algorithms Standards

From: William Sit
Subject: Re: [Axiom-developer] Symbolic Algorithms Standards
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 09:10:57 -0400

Dear Tim:

This would be a very ambitious project. In brief, I think it would be more manageable to collect survey papers and books rather than a list of papers leading up to the most recent or efficient algorithms. The reason is, it is difficult to "order" the latter (chronological order by publication dates is only an approximation due to the lag between the research work and final publication, and may lead to claims difficult to adjudicate). Survey papers or books have done the "distillation" and are usually easier to follow. At least, I think that might be a first step. The next stage can be a refinement to include the critical papers themselves.


On Sat,  9 Aug 2014 22:54:14 -0400 (EDT)
 Tim Daly <address@hidden> wrote:
The time has come, it seems to me, to organize an effort to collect and standardize symbolic algorithms, similar in spirit
to the NIST Handbook of Mathematical Functions.

It should be possible to order algorithm development for things like integration, starting with Liouville's work, then Risch, etc. The idea is to provide the algorithm and a series of improvements in some reasonably accessible pseudocode, perhaps with some agreed-upon benchmark of time and space complexity. There should also be an associated website with a cache of the papers for each algorithm. The book would be updated yearly with new developments.

I have been collecting bibliographic references as part of the Axiom project and have recently started organizing them by topic.

Is a NIST-like algorithm collection reasonable? Opinions welcome.

Tim Daly

William Sit, Professor Emeritus
Mathematics, City College of New York
Office: R6/291D Tel: 212-650-5179
Home Page:

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]