Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

3 Pages<123>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline Jean Giraud  
#21 Posted : 15 August 2019 16:33:00(UTC)
Jean Giraud


Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC)
Posts: 3,887
Canada

Was thanked: 699 time(s) in 547 post(s)
... this project is left as interpreted from insufficient information.
Done SS 6179 ... would be wise to cross check other SS version [7019].

Project Fission.sm (153kb) downloaded 12 time(s).
Offline omorr  
#22 Posted : 15 August 2019 17:26:29(UTC)
omorr


Rank: Administration

Groups: Registered, Administrators, Advanced Member
Joined: 23/06/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,723
Man
Serbia

Was thanked: 305 time(s) in 261 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Jean Giraud Go to Quoted Post
... this project is left as interpreted from insufficient information.
Done SS 6179 ... would be wise to cross check other SS version [7019].

Project Fission.sm (153kb) downloaded 12 time(s).


Hello Jean,

Is this what you mean? Checked with version 7019, and plots do not work.

maxallowedpositive.png
When Sisyphus climbed to the top of a hill, they said: "Wrong boulder!"
Offline Jean Giraud  
#23 Posted : 15 August 2019 18:01:43(UTC)
Jean Giraud


Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC)
Posts: 3,887
Canada

Was thanked: 699 time(s) in 547 post(s)
Originally Posted by: omorr Go to Quoted Post
Hello Jean,

Is this what you mean? Checked with version 7019, and plots do not work.


Thanks Radovan.
SS 7019 needs be be doctored quite seriously.
What can be so hard to digest ?
As it looks, SS 7019 does not recognize exponents < 10-15
If so: should be easy to fix ?
If it tabulates the low exponents, then the plot is guilty,
that does not make sense either ...
Maybe too early to tag SS 7019 big toe a dead patient !
Cheers ... Jean

FissionStem.PNG
Offline Jean Giraud  
#24 Posted : 15 August 2019 20:04:28(UTC)
Jean Giraud


Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC)
Posts: 3,887
Canada

Was thanked: 699 time(s) in 547 post(s)
... Is there any red ?
Copy/paste in IrfanView, Resize-Resample to enlarge the ^-
I wish the paper shows some result or graph.


MeV.PNG
Offline Jean Giraud  
#25 Posted : 15 August 2019 20:19:50(UTC)
Jean Giraud


Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC)
Posts: 3,887
Canada

Was thanked: 699 time(s) in 547 post(s)
SS 6179 ... exp(709.782)=1.796412028*10^308
SS 7019 ... exp(709.782)= red or something
Offline omorr  
#26 Posted : 16 August 2019 12:19:23(UTC)
omorr


Rank: Administration

Groups: Registered, Administrators, Advanced Member
Joined: 23/06/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,723
Man
Serbia

Was thanked: 305 time(s) in 261 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Jean Giraud Go to Quoted Post
... Is there any red ?
Copy/paste in IrfanView, Resize-Resample to enlarge the ^-
I wish the paper shows some result or graph.


MeV.PNG


There are some results for the MeV matrix. When the numbers of rows j>11 the red is coming back.
Although there are few differences between the pictures. Some numbers are zero on the first one contrary to some small numbers on the other one.
Is there any significance of this?

floatsymb.PNG
Regards,
Radovan

Edited by user 16 August 2019 12:25:18(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

When Sisyphus climbed to the top of a hill, they said: "Wrong boulder!"
Offline Jean Giraud  
#27 Posted : 16 August 2019 15:25:45(UTC)
Jean Giraud


Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC)
Posts: 3,887
Canada

Was thanked: 699 time(s) in 547 post(s)
Thanks Radovan for your reply.
YAF.NET refused to quote your message entirely ?

1. Does YAF.NET freaks the ranges to bracket format ?
2. Is it 7109 that freaks the ranges to bracket.
3. What does the bracket range format 7109 vs normal ranges 6179 ?
That kind of problem was observed recently [from recollection NDTMA ?]

What about re-code the ranges 7109 as per 6179 ?
No more from the Originator [graph, results ...]
Maybe not a public paper ... or home made for classroom ?
More puzzling: more Doctors are gone fishing ...

Cheers ... Jean

Bug 7109.PNG
Offline overlord  
#28 Posted : 16 August 2019 16:23:38(UTC)
overlord


Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 23/07/2013(UTC)
Posts: 96
Turkey

Was thanked: 33 time(s) in 22 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Jean Giraud Go to Quoted Post


What about re-code the ranges 7109 as per 6179 ?
No more from the Originator [graph, results ...]
Maybe not a public paper ... or home made for classroom ?
More puzzling: more Doctors are gone fishing ...

Cheers ... Jean




not related with ranges function. even rewriting as for(4)
function, equation gives the same problematic result.

fission.png

I have downloaded several old versions and found the last
working version is 0.99.6824. After this version there is
none giving the expected result.

Regards

Offline omorr  
#29 Posted : 16 August 2019 16:34:43(UTC)
omorr


Rank: Administration

Groups: Registered, Administrators, Advanced Member
Joined: 23/06/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,723
Man
Serbia

Was thanked: 305 time(s) in 261 post(s)
Hello Jean,

I just put 11 in the range because any number greater than 11 will produce the famous error "...above max. positive number...".
The only thing I can figure out is that the version [7109] (and some versions before) has some serious problems with float/symbolic calculations.
Therefore I can consider this as a serious bug.

Regards,
Radovan

Edited by user 16 August 2019 16:39:54(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

When Sisyphus climbed to the top of a hill, they said: "Wrong boulder!"
Offline Jean Giraud  
#30 Posted : 16 August 2019 17:42:40(UTC)
Jean Giraud


Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC)
Posts: 3,887
Canada

Was thanked: 699 time(s) in 547 post(s)
Originally Posted by: omorr Go to Quoted Post
Hello Jean,

I just put 11 in the range because any number greater than 11 will produce the famous error "...above max. positive number...".
The only thing I can figure out is that the version [7109] (and some versions before) has some serious problems with float/symbolic calculations.
Therefore I can consider this as a serious bug.

Regards,
Radovan


Simple: tag the big toe of all SS past 6179 Dead Bodies
exp(709.782)=1.796412028*10^308 ... What do you get ?
Have a good day [night] Radovan ... Jean
Offline omorr  
#31 Posted : 16 August 2019 18:14:52(UTC)
omorr


Rank: Administration

Groups: Registered, Administrators, Advanced Member
Joined: 23/06/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,723
Man
Serbia

Was thanked: 305 time(s) in 261 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Jean Giraud Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: omorr Go to Quoted Post
Hello Jean,

I just put 11 in the range because any number greater than 11 will produce the famous error "...above max. positive number...".
The only thing I can figure out is that the version [7109] (and some versions before) has some serious problems with float/symbolic calculations.
Therefore I can consider this as a serious bug.

Regards,
Radovan


Simple: tag the big toe of all SS past 6179 Dead Bodies
exp(709.782)=1.796412028*10^308 ... What do you get ?
Have a good day [night] Radovan ... Jean


expfun.PNG

Thank you Jean. All the best to you.
When Sisyphus climbed to the top of a hill, they said: "Wrong boulder!"
Offline Jean Giraud  
#32 Posted : 17 August 2019 05:03:00(UTC)
Jean Giraud


Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC)
Posts: 3,887
Canada

Was thanked: 699 time(s) in 547 post(s)
Originally Posted by: omorr Go to Quoted Post
The only thing I can figure out is that the version [7109] (and some versions before) has some serious problems with float/symbolic calculations.
Therefore I can consider this as a serious bug.

My Kalkulator is older than my Mathcad 8 Pro. [2000]

Kalkulator.PNG

Does it suggest some profitable code ?
Up until now, this bug hasn't been attended.
How many more undiscovered ?
Thanks Radovan for your dedication, sincerely ... Jean

Offline Jean Giraud  
#33 Posted : 17 August 2019 18:18:39(UTC)
Jean Giraud


Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC)
Posts: 3,887
Canada

Was thanked: 699 time(s) in 547 post(s)
... last brick in the wall.

Kalkulator-Casio.PNG
Offline Jean Giraud  
#34 Posted : 21 August 2019 15:53:26(UTC)
Jean Giraud


Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC)
Posts: 3,887
Canada

Was thanked: 699 time(s) in 547 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Jean Giraud Go to Quoted Post
... last brick in the wall.

exp(709.782)=1.79641202802057*10^308
That's what it has to be checked first SS 7019
Next, wrt the long thread: if exp(x) OK
then why it scraps the Originator project vs SS 6179 that does it.
That revisit to insure the bug has not yet be incinerated.
May be it should, being so little attractive.

Offline omorr  
#35 Posted : 21 August 2019 16:12:01(UTC)
omorr


Rank: Administration

Groups: Registered, Administrators, Advanced Member
Joined: 23/06/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,723
Man
Serbia

Was thanked: 305 time(s) in 261 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Jean Giraud Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: Jean Giraud Go to Quoted Post
... last brick in the wall.

exp(709.782)=1.79641202802057*10^308
That's what it has to be checked first SS 7019
Next, wrt the long thread: if exp(x) OK
then why it scraps the Originator project vs SS 6179 that does it.
That revisit to insure the bug has not yet be incinerated.
May be it should, being so little attractive.


Helo Jean,

From this thread, the examples and comments it is obvious that something is fishy here regarding that the same thing is working in the previous SMath versions but not in the recent ones. There is no answer from anyone yet what's wrong.

Regards,
Radovan
When Sisyphus climbed to the top of a hill, they said: "Wrong boulder!"
Offline overlord  
#36 Posted : 21 August 2019 17:13:48(UTC)
overlord


Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 23/07/2013(UTC)
Posts: 96
Turkey

Was thanked: 33 time(s) in 22 post(s)
Quote:

Helo Jean,

From this thread, the examples and comments it is obvious that something is fishy here regarding that the same thing is working in the previous SMath versions but not in the recent ones. There is no answer from anyone yet what's wrong.

Regards,
Radovan

I figured this is not a problem related only with Smath Studio.

https://groups.google.com/forum/...t-sys.matlab/s8NTeTEQV7I
https://forum.dlang.org/post/rhn...lxpcstzy@forum.dlang.org
https://books.google.com.tr/book...nepage&q&f=false


For example, you can calculate exp(709.782) via Google.
But not exp(709.783), it gives nothing.

Online maxima can not calculate also. http://maxima.cesga.es
Wolframalpha can calculate though. https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=exp%28709.783%29

Maybe the previous source code was not suitable to 64-bit IEEE 754 binary arithmetic in those previous versions.
I think Andrey changed the calculation code according to IEEE and because of it infinite overflow error popup.

Regards
thanks 1 user thanked overlord for this useful post.
on 21/08/2019(UTC)
Offline omorr  
#37 Posted : 21 August 2019 18:47:54(UTC)
omorr


Rank: Administration

Groups: Registered, Administrators, Advanced Member
Joined: 23/06/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,723
Man
Serbia

Was thanked: 305 time(s) in 261 post(s)
Let me repeat my main point about this error which I believe it is a bug. It is not about exp() function.
Please try in every software you want to calculate this simple addition of two small numbers.

abovemax.png

SMath will issue an error (with the rather confusing message) but every other software I tried will not. The result will be either zero or 1.5e-115. That is the point.

Regards,
Radovan

Edited by user 21 August 2019 18:49:39(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

When Sisyphus climbed to the top of a hill, they said: "Wrong boulder!"
thanks 1 user thanked omorr for this useful post.
on 21/08/2019(UTC)
Offline overlord  
#38 Posted : 21 August 2019 19:52:57(UTC)
overlord


Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 23/07/2013(UTC)
Posts: 96
Turkey

Was thanked: 33 time(s) in 22 post(s)
Originally Posted by: omorr Go to Quoted Post
Let me repeat my main point about this error which I believe it is a bug. It is not about exp() function.
Please try in every software you want to calculate this simple addition of two small numbers.

abovemax.png

SMath will issue an error (with the rather confusing message) but every other software I tried will not. The result will be either zero or 1.5e-115. That is the point.

Regards,
Radovan

You are right Radovan, this should be a bug. I have checked the addition on old versions.
0.99.7016 (and older versions) can calculate the mentioned additon, 0.99.7100 and after doesn't.

Let me clarify something, exp(709.783) is still not calculated on 0.99.6824 too.
But somehow the Project Fission.sm calculations can be done with 0.99.6824.

There is some serious issues over here.

Regards


Offline Jean Giraud  
#39 Posted : 21 August 2019 21:42:04(UTC)
Jean Giraud


Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC)
Posts: 3,887
Canada

Was thanked: 699 time(s) in 547 post(s)
Originally Posted by: overlord Go to Quoted Post
Let me clarify something, exp(709.783) is still not calculated on 0.99.6824 too.

The utmost limit 709.782 except Kalkulator and Casio
from some method switching from exp(x) to some series.
That kind of magnitude has certainly no interest.
Why 7019 is bug ?

Offline CBG  
#40 Posted : 22 August 2019 00:46:44(UTC)
CBG


Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 14/10/2015(UTC)
Posts: 217

Was thanked: 44 time(s) in 32 post(s)
The Free42 calculator for Android supports the value of 14,140 for the exp () function
exp (14140) = 8.3941 E+6140

Free42_exp_14140.png

Best Regards

Carlos
Users browsing this topic
Similar Topics
[SS-3575] Potential-exponential function error (Bugs & Problems)
by Razonar 15/10/2018 19:08:46(UTC)
3 Pages<123>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.