-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 453
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
simplify_hypergeometric bug #22467
Comments
comment:1
User error. Assumptions given earlier interferred with |
comment:3
Hijacking ticket to prevent waste. Quite a similar error, this time for real. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
comment:6
This is an issue in conversion from maxima:
|
comment:7
Probably boils down to
which in turn comes from
|
comment:8
mpmath returns
and Wolfram Alpha agrees with it but also agrees with the nonzero value for the 2F1 expression so the simplification by Maxima seems wrong. On another note there is this in
However in Wikipedia that if |m|>l then Plm=0, so the code seems wrong (missing the abs). |
comment:9
Confirmation from arb:
|
comment:10
Maybe because Legendre polynomials can be extended to rational parameters either by 0 or by hypergeometric functions. What we see looks like a clash of extensions, no ? |
comment:11
No, the relevant extension is http://dlmf.nist.gov/14.3.E6 and it holds for x > 1 but the 2F1 argument here is 0.276 which makes x around 0.447, i.e. < 1. Agree? |
comment:12
Seems to have been fixed, maybe by #25034 In Sage 9.3 and above:
|
Reviewer: Dima Pasechnik |
The result of expansion of a
2F1
expression usingsimplify_hypergeometric
differs from computing the numeric directly:Inside maxima:
CC: @slel
Component: calculus
Reviewer: Dima Pasechnik
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/22467
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: