2 detailed summary tables of results

 2.1 Detailed conclusion table per each integral for all CAS systems
 2.2 Detailed conclusion table specific for Rubi results

2.1 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 Rubi in Sympy










grade A A A A A A A A A
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 40 40 23 20 31 42 116 31 34
normalized size 1 1. 0.57 0.5 0.78 1.05 2.9 0.78 0.85
time (sec) N/A 0.023 0.05 0.006 1.367 0.205 2.524 0.245 2.433




















Problem 2 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac Rubi in Sympy










grade A A A A A A A A A
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 24 24 24 19 47 58 20 51 22
normalized size 1 1. 1. 0.79 1.96 2.42 0.83 2.12 0.92
time (sec) N/A 0.035 0.019 0.004 1.598 0.218 0.155 0.235 4.233




















Problem 3 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac Rubi in Sympy










grade A A A A F(-2) A A A A
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 42 42 41 36 0 1 144 82 34
normalized size 1 1. 0.98 0.86 0. 0.02 3.43 1.95 0.81
time (sec) N/A 0.075 0.049 0.017 0. 0.251 16.205 0.203 2.764




















Problem 4 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac Rubi in Sympy










grade A A B A A A A A A
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 15 15 34 12 20 31 10 16 10
normalized size 1 1. 2.27 0.8 1.33 2.07 0.67 1.07 0.67
time (sec) N/A 0.022 0.041 0.043 1.342 0.226 0.329 0.212 0.646




















Problem 5 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac Rubi in Sympy










grade A A A A A A A A A
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 21 21 39 20 39 28 19 28 19
normalized size 1 1. 1.86 0.95 1.86 1.33 0.9 1.33 0.9
time (sec) N/A 0.022 0.021 0.049 1.378 0.228 0.347 0.246 0.826




















Problem 6 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac Rubi in Sympy










grade A A B A A A A A A
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 12 21 26 11 20 27 8 14 15
normalized size 1 1.75 2.17 0.92 1.67 2.25 0.67 1.17 1.25
time (sec) N/A 0.026 0.028 0.046 1.408 0.214 0.809 0.213 0.593




















Problem 7 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac Rubi in Sympy










grade A A A A A A A A A
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 43 43 24 20 31 53 42 66 26
normalized size 1 1. 0.56 0.47 0.72 1.23 0.98 1.53 0.6
time (sec) N/A 0.066 0.038 0.047 1.504 0.227 0.841 0.234 0.84




















Problem 8 Optimal Rubi Mathematica Maple Maxima Fricas Sympy Giac Rubi in Sympy










grade A A A A A A A A A
verified N/A Yes Yes TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
size 30 30 31 35 46 51 32 49 24
normalized size 1 1. 1.03 1.17 1.53 1.7 1.07 1.63 0.8
time (sec) N/A 0.029 0.01 0.011 1.367 0.216 0.606 0.211 3.083










2.2 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 [3] had the largest ratio of [ 0.25 ]

Table 1: Rubi 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 2 1 1. 17 0.059







2 A 2 2 1. 18 0.111







3 A 2 2 1. 8 0.25







4 A 2 2 1. 12 0.167







5 A 2 2 1. 12 0.167







6 A 1 1 1.75 12 0.083







7 A 3 3 1. 12 0.25







8 A 4 4 1. 16 0.25