Which CAS use multiple representations for mathematical objects?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on how various computer algebra systems (CAS) manage multiple representations of mathematical objects, particularly polynomials. It explores the implications of different design choices regarding data structures and representation methods within CAS.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that a CAS could either use a single data structure for a mathematical object while allowing multiple construction methods, or maintain multiple representations of the same object.
  • Another participant shares a resource about syntax trees for representing mathematical expressions in a nominal CAS.
  • One participant argues that polynomials should only be stored as a list of coefficients, suggesting that factoring is equivalent to finding roots, especially for polynomials of degree five or higher where analytical solutions are not possible.
  • A later reply questions whether the equivalence of factoring and finding roots holds for polynomials in several variables.
  • Another participant expresses skepticism about the equivalence of factoring and finding roots for multivariable polynomials, suggesting that this may not be the case.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of representing polynomials as lists of roots or factors based on the established understanding in one variable.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the representation of polynomials, particularly regarding the relationship between factoring and finding roots, especially in the context of multivariable polynomials. No consensus is reached on the best approach to representation within CAS.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in the understanding of polynomial representations, particularly regarding the complexity introduced by multiple variables and the analytical challenges associated with higher-degree polynomials.

Stephen Tashi
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Education Advisor
Messages
7,864
Reaction score
1,602
TL;DR
How do various computer algebra systems compare with respect to keeping multiple representations of the same mathematical object?
How do various computer algebra systems (CAS) compare with respect to keeping multiple representations of the same mathematical object?

For example, a polynomial could be represented by a list of coefficients, or a list of roots, or a list of factors with some factors non-linear. One design for a CAS would be to allow different ways to construct a mathematical object but only use a single data structure for it. For example, a CAS might allow polynomials to be constructed by a function that took factors as the input, but the only data kept for the polynomial might be the list of coefficients. An alternative method would be to keep multiple representations of the same mathematical object in the data for that object. Then algorithms on mathematical objects would need procedures to decide which representations to use.
 
Computer science news on Phys.org
I'm not sure what you're looking for exactly but did find this article about syntax trees for holding math expressions in a nominal CAS:

https://www.math.wpi.edu/IQP/BVCalcHist/calc5.html
 
I think you would only ever store a polynomial as a list of coefficients; factoring it is the same as finding roots, and for degree >= 5 that is analytically impossible.

I think the trick comes in knowing that p \in \mathbb{R}[x] and (\mathbb{C} \to \mathbb{R} : t \mapsto p(t)) are in some sense the same object.
 
Last edited:
pasmith said:
factoring it is the same as finding roots
I'm curious whether this is true for polynomials in several variables.
 
Stephen Tashi said:
I'm curious whether this is true for polynomials in several variables.

I don't think it is. But the fact that it holds in one variable is a reason not to represent a polynomial as either a list of roots or a list of factors.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 64 ·
3
Replies
64
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K