On Wednesday, 12 December 2012 02:28:19 UTC, kcrisman wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, December 11, 2012 6:52:53 PM UTC-5, JamesHDavenport wrote: > >> Pedantic Note. Jacques Carette's paper: Understanding Expression >> Simplification. >> Proc. ISSAC 2004 (ed. J. Gutierrez), ACM Press, New York, 2004, pp. 72-79. >> http://www.cas.mcmaster.ca/~carette/publications/simplification.pdf. >> defines it in a useful way, just not in a computable way (that I can see >> in practice). >> > > Very interesting paper. I guess I was referring to the sense that > > (1+x)(1-x) > > and > > 1-x^2 > > might each be considered "simpler" depending on the context, which is the > way a lot of people who don't know about decidability would perceive this > question (or so my experience has been interacting with a lot of people who > ask about why Sage doesn't "simplify" this or that). I suppose the answer > to my example would depend on what you pick for your axiomoids? RJF always > seems to have a useful comment about these things as well. > Carette would argue that 1-x^2 requires fewer characters (or tree nodes, or whatever), so is definitely 'simpler'. I would add 'if the user wants 'factor', he/she should ask for it!
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-support" group. To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support?hl=en.
