hello,
I'm a new user...hope you can help me getting started! (of course I've tried to look for the answer before writing) I need to work with a matrix with parameters, but I don't know how can I do it (if it's possible) is there a way to calc a determinant of a matrix with an undefined parameter?? for example A=[a,0;0,a] i'd like to ask Octave to calc det (A), and have as an answer a^2... matrixes I'm working with are much more complex, and with more parameters...any way to work with them? hope you can help... thank you all! |
Octave is meant for numerical computations (numbers, not symbols) in contrast to calculations of computer algebra systems. You can do a a lot symbolic operations in Octave when installing the corresonding package [1]. However, for your determinants you should probably consider using Maxima [2] or Mathematica/Maple (non-fee). For simple calculations Wolfram Alpha is also often useful. Sebastian [1] https://wiki.octave.org/Symbolic_package [2] http://maxima.sourceforge.net/ |
thanks Sebastian. i didn't understand if symbolic package can work with such matrix or not. anyway, I've just downloaded maxima, and trying to work with that. 2017-07-01 12:11 GMT+02:00 Sebastian Schöps [via Octave] <[hidden email]>: Octave is meant for numerical computations (numbers, not symbols) in contrast to calculations of computer algebra systems. You can do a a lot symbolic operations in Octave when installing the corresonding package [1]. However, for your determinants you should probably consider using Maxima [2] or Mathematica/Maple (non-fee). For simple calculations Wolfram Alpha is also often useful. |
On 01/07/17 03:37 AM, f.g.fornari wrote:
> thanks Sebastian. > i didn't understand if symbolic package can work with such matrix or not. > anyway, I've just downloaded maxima, and trying to work with that. Good luck. In case you do want to try again with Octave and the Symbolic pkg: >> pkg load symbolic >> syms a >> A = [a, 0; 0, a] A = (sym 2×2 matrix) ⎡a 0⎤ ⎢ ⎥ ⎣0 a⎦ >> det(A) ans = (sym) 2 a best, Colin _______________________________________________ Help-octave mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-octave |
Thanks Colin for giving the Octave example. In my experience, it's often better to clearly seperate between numerics and symbolics (even though reality is nowadys rather grey than black&white). This is not meant to discredite the symbolic package. |
On 01/07/17 10:15 AM, Sebastian Schöps wrote:
> Thanks Colin for giving the Octave example. In my experience, it's often > better to clearly seperate between numerics and symbolics (even though > reality is nowadys rather grey than black&white). This is not meant to > discredite the symbolic package. I agree completely. Its probably a widely-held view, but I cite Rob Corless (as someone who has worked extensively in both areas). Colin _______________________________________________ Help-octave mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-octave |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |