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, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 }

B grade: { }

C grade: { }

F grade: { }

2.1.2 Mathematica

A grade: { 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 }

B grade: { }

C grade: { 5 }

F grade: { }

2.1.3 Maple

A grade: { 2, 3, 4, 9, 10, 11, 12 }

B grade: { 1, 5, 6, 7, 8, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 }

C grade: { }

F grade: { }

2.1.4 Maxima

A grade: { 9, 10, 11, 12

B grade: { }

C grade: { }

F grade: { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 }

2.1.5 FriCAS

A grade: { 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 10, 11, 12 }

B grade: { 5, 6, 7, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 }

C grade: { }

F grade: { 8, 18, 19, 20 }

2.1.6 Sympy

A grade: { 3, 9, 10, 11 }

B grade: { 12 }

C grade: { }

F grade: { 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 }

2.1.7 Giac

A grade: { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 12 }

B grade: { }

C grade: { }

F grade: { 6, 7, 8, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 }

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 B F(-2) A F(-1) A
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 136 136 239 344 0 1125 0 207
normalized size 1 1. 1.76 2.53 0. 8.27 0. 1.52
time (sec) N/A 0.232 0.534 0.027 0. 2.593 0. 1.144


















Problem 2 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A A F(-2) A F(-1) A
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 76 76 131 141 0 641 0 103
normalized size 1 1. 1.72 1.86 0. 8.43 0. 1.36
time (sec) N/A 0.13 0.257 0.02 0. 1.964 0. 1.138


















Problem 3 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A A F(-2) A A A
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 35 35 39 36 0 317 99 47
normalized size 1 1. 1.11 1.03 0. 9.06 2.83 1.34
time (sec) N/A 0.046 0.033 0.013 0. 1.704 6.011 1.189


















Problem 4 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A A F(-2) A F A
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 129 129 126 223 0 1100 0 176
normalized size 1 1. 0.98 1.73 0. 8.53 0. 1.36
time (sec) N/A 0.172 0.182 0.036 0. 7.397 0. 1.166


















Problem 5 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A C B F(-2) B F(-1) A
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 205 205 392 546 0 4351 0 510
normalized size 1 1. 1.91 2.66 0. 21.22 0. 2.49
time (sec) N/A 0.465 2.185 0.046 0. 66.788 0. 1.15


















Problem 6 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A B F B F(-1) F(-1)
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 388 386 374 2608 0 10364 0 0
normalized size 1 0.99 0.96 6.72 0. 26.71 0. 0.
time (sec) N/A 11.013 0.843 0.086 0. 13.34 0. 0.


















Problem 7 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A B F B F(-1) F(-1)
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 260 260 238 1157 0 1987 0 0
normalized size 1 1. 0.92 4.45 0. 7.64 0. 0.
time (sec) N/A 1.284 0.618 0.044 0. 2.469 0. 0.


















Problem 8 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A B F(-1) F(-1) F F(-1)
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 326 326 335 2816 0 0 0 0
normalized size 1 1. 1.03 8.64 0. 0. 0. 0.
time (sec) N/A 3.34 0.921 0.061 0. 0. 0. 0.


















Problem 9 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 21 21 19 16 20 68 15 23
normalized size 1 1. 0.9 0.76 0.95 3.24 0.71 1.1
time (sec) N/A 0.024 0.025 0.025 0.948 1.313 0.243 1.783


















Problem 10 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 23 23 29 16 20 69 15 26
normalized size 1 1. 1.26 0.7 0.87 3. 0.65 1.13
time (sec) N/A 0.028 0.014 0.028 0.952 1.298 0.324 1.404


















Problem 11 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 19 19 18 18 20 74 26 20
normalized size 1 1. 0.95 0.95 1.05 3.89 1.37 1.05
time (sec) N/A 0.036 0.026 0.022 1.428 1.23 0.508 1.44


















Problem 12 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A A A A B A
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 36 36 34 31 38 139 119 38
normalized size 1 1. 0.94 0.86 1.06 3.86 3.31 1.06
time (sec) N/A 0.033 0.073 0.025 1.443 1.405 1.985 1.476


















Problem 13 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A B F B F(-1) F(-1)
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 326 326 356 3427 0 16717 0 0
normalized size 1 1. 1.09 10.51 0. 51.28 0. 0.
time (sec) N/A 4.062 1.059 0.057 0. 29.164 0. 0.


















Problem 14 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A B F B F(-1) F(-1)
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 299 299 309 2503 0 13111 0 0
normalized size 1 1. 1.03 8.37 0. 43.85 0. 0.
time (sec) N/A 6.758 0.827 0.05 0. 13.015 0. 0.


















Problem 15 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A B F B F(-1) F(-1)
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 255 255 264 1948 0 9790 0 0
normalized size 1 1. 1.04 7.64 0. 38.39 0. 0.
time (sec) N/A 1.262 0.547 0.049 0. 6.426 0. 0.


















Problem 16 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A B F B F(-1) F(-1)
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 230 230 227 1264 0 7050 0 0
normalized size 1 1. 0.99 5.5 0. 30.65 0. 0.
time (sec) N/A 0.546 0.571 0.036 0. 3.451 0. 0.


















Problem 17 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A B F B F(-1) F(-1)
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 223 223 198 1262 0 7070 0 0
normalized size 1 1. 0.89 5.66 0. 31.7 0. 0.
time (sec) N/A 0.35 0.398 0.035 0. 3.52 0. 0.


















Problem 18 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A B F F(-1) F F(-1)
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 245 245 281 1957 0 0 0 0
normalized size 1 1. 1.15 7.99 0. 0. 0. 0.
time (sec) N/A 0.772 0.641 0.056 0. 0. 0. 0.


















Problem 19 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A B F F(-1) F F(-1)
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 275 275 348 2530 0 0 0 0
normalized size 1 1. 1.27 9.2 0. 0. 0. 0.
time (sec) N/A 1.189 1.162 0.065 0. 0. 0. 0.


















Problem 20 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac









grade A A A B F F(-1) F(-1) F(-1)
verified N/A Yes NO TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 334 334 446 3476 0 0 0 0
normalized size 1 1. 1.34 10.41 0. 0. 0. 0.
time (sec) N/A 4.674 2.895 0.076 0. 0. 0. 0.









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 [5] had the largest ratio of [ 0.4737 ]

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 7 6 1. 19 0.316







2 A 7 6 1. 19 0.316







3 A 3 3 1. 17 0.176







4 A 9 8 1. 17 0.471







5 A 10 9 1. 19 0.474







6 A 10 7 0.99 19 0.368







7 A 7 4 1. 19 0.21







8 A 9 5 1. 19 0.263







9 A 4 3 1. 13 0.231







10 A 4 3 1. 15 0.2







11 A 3 3 1. 15 0.2







12 A 4 4 1. 15 0.267







13 A 10 7 1. 19 0.368







14 A 8 5 1. 19 0.263







15 A 7 4 1. 19 0.21







16 A 6 3 1. 17 0.176







17 A 5 3 1. 14 0.214







18 A 8 5 1. 17 0.294







19 A 10 7 1. 19 0.368







20 A 12 8 1. 19 0.421