# Tag Info

22

The package and all code of this answer can be found on my GitHub account. A solution that takes only small amount of time is to follow this route: take the first usable java library for accessing and changing PDF files you find do one of the following: write a small amount of Java code to create a simple interface to the functionality (if you are ...

15

This is a bug in the paclet manager, which can cause the autoloading for certain system symbols to stop working (in this case, CreateUUID malfunctioned, also breaking Information which uses it). The problem has already been fixed in the development version. For now, the recommended workaround is to delete the $UserBasePacletsDirectory, which is typically ... 13 From the PDF file definitions (7.5.4 - 7.5.6) you don't need to modify the inner structure of a PDF file to make changes, its enough to append the new definitions of the components (New or old) and suitable cross-reference section with pointers to the shift positions of some relevant components for random access. Here I attempt some code to do all the work ... 8 Specifying the DistanceFunction seems to fix it. Nearest[v, 39.28, {All, 8.57}, DistanceFunction -> (Norm[#1 - #2] &)] {39.28, 33.81, 33.56, 32.47, 31.12, 30.72} Note that the radius had to be changed also because Nearest will return points whose distance are strictly less than the radius. 8 There is a symbolic calculation bug in there: Let's define: plus[k_, m_] := f[1/2 (2 + m + Sqrt[4 - 4 k + m^2])]; minus[k_, m_] := f[1/2 (2 + m - Sqrt[4 - 4 k + m^2])]; While (With[{m = 60}, Sum[minus[k, m], {k, 1, -1 + m, 2}]] // N) == (Sum[minus[k, m], {k, 1, -1 + m, 2}] /. m -> 60 // N) (* True *) on the other hand: (With[{m = ... 6 This bug has been fixed as of version 10.0. The current result is (used Mathematica 10.2 on OS X, but other platforms also seem fine) 5 This is interesting! Here's a partial answer (so more of a long comment): Clear[f] f[x_] = x^2; Sum[f[1/2 (2 + m + Sqrt[4 - 4 k + m^2])], {k, 1, -1 + m, 2}] and the output is: whereas Sum[f[1/2 (2 + m - Sqrt[4 - 4 k + m^2])], {k, 1, -1 + m, 2}] doesn't evaluate (i.e. it returns itself), and Sum[f[1/2 (2 + m + Sqrt[4 - 4 k + m^2])] + f[1/2 (2 + m - ... 4 Bug introduced in 10.1 and fixed in 10.2 From the comments of @Szabolcs and @SquareOne: Works under OS X in 10.0 and 10.2, but not in 10.1. From my observations: Works under Win7x64 in 8.0 and 10.2, but not 10.1. 4 This specific problem has indeed been resolved as of version 10.0.2, although it is still possible to run into similar behavior in other computations. The Mac failure mode is worse than on other systems. To give an idea what was behind the system freeze, one of the operations attempted in the background by the Predictive Interface was a heuristic (based on ... 4 The problem seems to be because of the data v contains Integer numbers and real numbers. check this v2=DeleteCases[v, _Integer]; Nearest[v2, 39.28, {6, 8.56}] (*{39.28, 33.81, 33.56, 32.47, 31.12}*) Nearest[N[v], 39.28, {6, 8.56}] (*@ilian*) (*{39.28, 33.81, 33.56, 32.47, 31.12}*) 4 It's a rounding problem. Try (Working on V9): Nearest[Rationalize@v, Rationalize@39.28, {6, Rationalize@8.56}] // N (* {39.28, 33.81, 33.56, 32.47, 31.12, 30.72} *) 4 The problem applies also to ListPlot and is related to the fact that all the datasets have exactly identical abscissas of the second point (which is the last point of the bottom line). To demonstrate this, at first I add the explicit abscissas into the dataset (the same bug persists): x = {{20, 15.3, 11.9, 8.8}, {16.5, 12.5, 9.2, 6.5}, {10.5, 8.5}}; x = ... 4 This is a bug in RegionPlot. For a possible workaround, try the following undocumented option RegionPlot[NIntegrate[PDF[NormalDistribution[0, 1], a], {a, 0, y}] >= 0.2, {x, -1, 1}, {y, 0.1, 0.7}, "NumericalFunction" -> False] 3 EDIT : Changed for your edited question$Version (* "10.2.0 for Mac OS X x86 (64-bit) (July 7, 2015)" *) Define a helper function that is defined only for numeric arguments f[y_?NumericQ] := NIntegrate[ PDF[NormalDistribution[0, 1], a], {a, 0, y}]; rgn = ImplicitRegion[ f[y] >= 0.2 && -1 <= x <= 1 && 0.1 <= y ...

3

Mathematica gives generic answers, and you will need to handle the singularity at m=-1 as a separate case. Even simpler than your example is: Integrate[x^m, x] x^(1 + m)/(1 + m) If you then evaluate at m=-1 you also get infinity Integrate[x^m, x]//.m->-1 Note that the generic answer holds for all m not equal to -1. The answer is correct for $m \neq ... 3 The general method which allows to avoid such problems is to specify the units in the canonical form and do not rely on the ability of Wolfram|Alpha to interpret your input correctly. The original problem arose due to misinterpretation of "Kelvin" as "KelvinsDifference" by Wolfram|Alpha (to which Mathematica communicates when you provide an unknown string ... 2 It is because a transformation rule in the SimplifyDump context is written without taking into account that Mathematica currently doesn't simplify zeroed Quantitiy expressions to a plain zero, which prevents the rule from detecting a division by zero. This happens even in the case where the Quantity has a correct unit, such as radians. Other than these ... 2 There are other mantraps! f = (p + a/V^2) (V - b) == R T; params1 = { b -> Quantity[0.0364, "L/mol"], a -> Quantity[135.8*10^3, "Pa*L^2/mol^2"], p -> Quantity[100, "kPa"], R -> Quantity[8.314472, "J/(mol*K)"],(*!!!*) T -> Quantity[300, "K"] }; First@NSolve[f /. params1, V ] NSolve::units: NSolve was unable to determine ... 2 It's clearly a bug, of course. You may also check the following "reformatting" weird behavior: If after executing TableView you "reexecute" the output, the negative numbers get their correct formatting: as mentioned in the comments above it looks like a ToBoxes bugged implementations for negative numbers. Any of the following work OK: a1 = Map[ToBoxes, ... 2 Whenever I print I highlight the bracket on the far right and right click ->save selection as->PDF (don't forget to delete the "Out[1]=" first) Then just throw it in your document editor of choice. The Mac default is "Preview." 2 Try this small variation over your original request RegionPlot[ Integrate[PDF[NormalDistribution[0, 1], a], {a, 0, x}] > 0.3 // Evaluate, {x, -10, 10}, {y, -1, 1}] 2 With Limit[] seems to work. Limit[Integrate[1/(t + 1 + \[Epsilon])* DiracDelta[t + 1], {t, -\[Infinity], \[Infinity]}], \[Epsilon] -> 0]$\infty$Limit[Integrate[1/(t + 1 - \[Epsilon])* DiracDelta[t + 1], {t, -\[Infinity], \[Infinity]}], \[Epsilon] -> 0]$-\infty$we have at the same point:$(\infty\ \text{and} -\infty) \to ...

2

Since Tube is rendered in the front end, there may be no way to discretize it. But here is a way to generate a tube and discretize it: DiscretizeGraphics@ ComputationalGeometryMethodsGraphicsComplexTube[ Table[{t, t^2, t^3}, {t, -1, 1, 0.1}], 0.2, PlotPoints -> 25, Mesh -> All] One might do a similar discretization of any of the methods ...

1

While the behavior has already been confirmed a bug -- an uncaught Throw from an internal function must always be one, right? -- here are a couple more workarounds. How I analyze the problem of finding a workaround: From the context NIntegrateLevinRuleDump in the error message, one might infer that NIntegrate is trying to determine whether to use (or even ...

Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible