Chapter 2
detailed summary tables of results

 2.1 List of integrals sorted by grade for each CAS
  2.1.1 Rubi
  2.1.2 Mathematica
  2.1.3 Maple
  2.1.4 Maxima
  2.1.5 FriCAS
  2.1.6 Sympy
  2.1.7 Giac
 2.2 Detailed conclusion table per each integral for all CAS systems
 2.3 Detailed conclusion table specific for Rubi results

2.1 List of integrals sorted by grade for each CAS

2.1.1 Rubi

A grade: { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14 }

B grade: { }

C grade: { }

F grade: { 12}

2.1.2 Mathematica

A grade: { 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 }

B grade: { }

C grade: { 4, 6 }

F grade: { }

2.1.3 Maple

A grade: { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 14 }

B grade: { }

C grade: { 6 }

F grade: { 10, 12, 13 }

2.1.4 Maxima

A grade: { 2, 10, 11

B grade: { 3, 5, 7, 8 }

C grade: { 9 }

F grade: { 1, 4, 6, 12, 13, 14 }

2.1.5 FriCAS

A grade: { 2, 6, 7, 9, 13, 14 }

B grade: { 1, 3, 5, 8, 11, 12 }

C grade: { }

F grade: { 4, 10 }

2.1.6 Sympy

A grade: { 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 14 }

B grade: { }

C grade: { }

F grade: { 1, 6, 8, 10, 12 }

2.1.7 Giac

A grade: { 1, 2, 7, 9, 13, 14 }

B grade: { 3, 5 }

C grade: { }

F grade: { 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12 }

2.2 Detailed conclusion table per each integral for all CAS systems

Detailed conclusion table per each integral is given by table below. The elapsed time is in seconds. For failed result it is given as F(-1) if the failure was due to timeout. It is given as F(-2) if the failure was due to an exception being raised, which could indicate a bug in the system. If the failure was due to integral not being evaluated within the time limit, then it is given just an F.

In this table,the column normalized size is defined as \(\frac{\text{antiderivative leaf size}}{\text{optimal antiderivative leaf size}}\)










Problem 1 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A A F B F(-1) A
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 28 28 28 29 0 140 0 46
normalized size 1 1. 1. 1.04 0. 5. 0. 1.64
time (sec) N/A 0.055 0.014 0.036 0. 2.248 0. 1.092


















Problem 2 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A A A A A A
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 2 2 2 3 3 15 2 3
normalized size 1 1. 1. 1.5 1.5 7.5 1. 1.5
time (sec) N/A 0.001 0.002 0.002 1.448 2.114 0.084 1.067


















Problem 3 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A A B B A B
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 14 14 14 19 34 78 8 34
normalized size 1 1. 1. 1.36 2.43 5.57 0.57 2.43
time (sec) N/A 0.006 0.002 0. 0.96 2.198 0.957 1.072


















Problem 4 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A C A F F A F
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 252 252 20 158 0 0 31 0
normalized size 1 1. 0.08 0.63 0. 0. 0.12 0.
time (sec) N/A 0.067 0.003 0.051 0. 0. 0.573 0.


















Problem 5 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A A B B A B
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 16 16 16 13 39 81 31 41
normalized size 1 1. 1. 0.81 2.44 5.06 1.94 2.56
time (sec) N/A 0.008 0.002 0.018 0.973 2.156 0.998 1.074


















Problem 6 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A C C F A F F
verified N/A Yes NO TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 76 76 1226 1290 0 205 0 0
normalized size 1 1. 16.13 16.97 0. 2.7 0. 0.
time (sec) N/A 0.028 1.637 0.58 0. 2.828 0. 0.


















Problem 7 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A A B A A A
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 13 13 13 17 194 43 10 22
normalized size 1 1. 1. 1.31 14.92 3.31 0.77 1.69
time (sec) N/A 0.071 0.028 0.014 0.979 2.274 0.163 1.083


















Problem 8 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A A B B F F
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 42 42 42 43 196 277 0 0
normalized size 1 1. 1. 1.02 4.67 6.6 0. 0.
time (sec) N/A 0.055 0.012 0.036 1.672 2.528 0. 0.


















Problem 9 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A A C A A A
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 2 2 2 3 18 23 2 3
normalized size 1 1. 1. 1.5 9. 11.5 1. 1.5
time (sec) N/A 0.011 0.011 0.004 1.094 2.338 0.564 1.086


















Problem 10 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A F A F(-2) F F
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 17 17 17 0 28 0 0 0
normalized size 1 1. 1. 0. 1.65 0. 0. 0.
time (sec) N/A 0.61 0.235 0.012 1.334 0. 0. 0.


















Problem 11 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A A A B A F
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 13 13 13 12 15 77 12 0
normalized size 1 1. 1. 0.92 1.15 5.92 0.92 0.
time (sec) N/A 0.029 0.023 0.004 0.949 2.656 1.621 0.


















Problem 12 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A F A F F B F F
verified N/A N/A Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 13 0 13 0 0 77 0 0
normalized size 1 0. 1. 0. 0. 5.92 0. 0.
time (sec) N/A 0.625 0.151 0.012 0. 2.207 0. 0.


















Problem 13 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A F F A A A
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 23 23 23 0 0 84 19 32
normalized size 1 1. 1. 0. 0. 3.65 0.83 1.39
time (sec) N/A 0.248 0.09 0.017 0. 2.352 0.55 1.093


















Problem 14 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A A F A A A
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 39 39 41 23 0 82 24 30
normalized size 1 1. 1.05 0.59 0. 2.1 0.62 0.77
time (sec) N/A 0.026 0.011 0.015 0. 2.06 0.119 1.113









2.3 Detailed conclusion table specific for Rubi results

The following table is specific to Rubi. It gives additional statistics for each integral. the column steps is the number of steps used by Rubi to obtain the antiderivative. The rules column is the number of unique rules used. The integrand size column is the leaf size of the integrand. Finally the ratio \(\frac{\text{number of rules}}{\text{integrand size}}\) is given. The larger this ratio is, the harder the integral was to solve. In this test, problem number [8] had the largest ratio of [ 0.6 ]

Table 2.1Rubi specific breakdown of results for each integral














# grade
number of
steps
used
number of
unique
rules
normalized
antiderivative
leaf size
integrand
leaf size
\(\frac{\text{number of rules}}{\text{integrand leaf size}}\)







1 A 6 6 1. 29 0.207







2 A 1 1 1. 7 0.143







3 A 3 3 1. 13 0.231







4 A 3 3 1. 13 0.231







5 A 3 3 1. 15 0.2







6 A 1 1 1. 19 0.053







7 A 6 4 1. 11 0.364







8 A 7 6 1. 10 0.6







9 A 1 1 1. 6 0.167







10 A 8 4 1. 43 0.093







11 A 2 1 1. 18 0.056







12 F 0 0 N/A 0 N/A







13 A 6 4 1. 31 0.129







14 A 1 1 1. 28 0.036