If I change the unkowns to a set instead of a list in the first attachement, in both cases an empty result is returned.

For the second attachement Maple does also not return an empty result immediately when a set is used. Maple tries "forever".

Update: The oberservation above was made with 2024, Physics 1724.

Attached is 1744 which is also different
why_solve_hangs_with_subscripted_may_15_2024_-_reply_c_r.mw

@ 

Since Maplesoft is not responding, I assume that you have discovered a real bug.

As Maple, MF must have a kind of a parser that translates user input to something that can be processed by a math server (called mserver in windows task manager) that does the math. The user interface then reformats the output from the server to something nice looking. Both Maple and MF use the same mserver. The MF parser must be different since MF input is different from Maple (=  versus   ;enter). It seems that the parser misinterprets the sum. The MF parser also prevents some commands and libraries from beeing used but not basic commands like sum (I would be surprised if not).

Here is my last suggestion. You can try to “smuggle” expressions unevaluated or with delayed evaluation to the  Maple server (replace ; by =)

sum('A^i', i = 0 .. 50);
 50    49    48    47    46    45    44    43    42    41    40
A   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A  

      39    38    37    36    35    34    33    32    31    30
   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A  

      29    28    27    26    25    24    23    22    21    20
   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A  

      19    18    17    16    15    14    13    12    11    10
   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A   + A  

      9    8    7    6    5    4    3    2        
   + A  + A  + A  + A  + A  + A  + A  + A  + A + 1


eval(sum('A^i', i = 0 .. 50));
             [1.81818180244525  0.909090893354340]
             [                                   ]
             [1.51515148892390  2.42424239801481 ]


eval('sum(A^i, i = 0 .. 50)');
                  [1.818181802  0.9090908934]
                  [                         ]
                  [1.515151489  2.424242398 ]

eval(uneval(sum(A^i, i = 0 .. 50)));
                  [1.818181802  0.9090908934]
                  [                         ]
                  [1.515151489  2.424242398 ]

I hope this can serve as a work arround until this issue gets fixed.
You said that entering numeric values is not that good as with Mathcad. Did you used the Tab key to jump from one matrix entry to the next?

The strange looking commands are badly renderd HTML codes closely realated MathML which is the underlying language for math formating. Normally they are not visible

Maples help system is a better reference (if available in MF)
Hope this helps.

@Thomas Richard @Ronan 

There was no change in the system configuration.
 

I kept the Maple sessions running. After 45 min I tried "save as" which either had an effect or the issue resolved on its own silently.
After that I restarted Windows again and the issue was back. I noticed windows explorer not showing file icons and the file preview in the explorer was not working. I connected via VPN to the domain network tried again "save as" and noticed that Maple started responding as normal.
 

I will now not restart the system (for the rest of my life) and get some work done.

Somehow awt.dll , seems to be involved in this but now the case is cold. Its difficult to drill down further since the Java environement is kind of a black box.

And: SFC found some corrupted files and registry entries. Next time I will run the tool before dooing anything else.

I still suspect something with the network. Maybe Windows can better deal with network issues than the JavaAPI which only uses a subset of system functions. Just a guess.

Thank you for the suggestions

@Thomas Richard 

I can't demonstrate this at the moment, but on 4k the red lines are not visible. Changing the display resolution, the font scaling and / or maple zoom makes the lines appear / disappear.

@ 

There is something weird. So far tried these and they should also work in Maple Flow according to the manual (chapter 5.1). Try copy pasting them (maybe this works better)
 

sum(A^i, i = 0 .. 50);
                  [1.818181802  0.9090908934]
                  [                         ]
                  [1.515151489  2.424242398 ]

add(seq(A^i, i = 0 .. 50));
             [1.81818180244525  0.909090893354340]
             [                                   ]
             [1.51515148892390  2.42424239801481 ]

add(A^i, i = 0 .. 50);
             [1.81818180244525  0.909090893354340]
             [                                   ]
             [1.51515148892390  2.42424239801481 ]

Did you enter the Matrix with the pallete? What happens when you enter the Matrix like this

A := Matrix(2, 2, [[0.2, 0.3], [0.5, 0.4]]);

Try also to verfiy of what type A is by entering

whattype(A)

You should get Matrix as answer.

@ 

using Maple I get an instanteanous response

Mapleflow allows to use Maple commands. This might be a help. Tomorrow someone from Maplesoft will probably give a better answer. As a general rule in Maple, add should be used for numerical summs and sum rather for symbolic expressions. This might be the reason for the slow response. Here sum works without delay.

Verify the range of the index (I do not have flow running)

You can also share a worksheet using the green arrow.

@acer 

Again the colon made the difference ;-).

I could paste and execute a modified command in the debugger

C := op(indets(workingODE,name) minus {constants} minus indets(equation,name))

which made ODESteps work.

odesteps_fail_may_10_2024-2_debug.mw

Just for interest: Can such a code injection be automated (e.g. until a fix is available)?

PS.: I will make a software change request if not done already

@acer 

My misinterpretation of the description. I read it this way: merging of brachnes required combine and simplification.

Thanks

@jackyleerush 

Update

For the state variables: The Matrix c relates the output to the state variables. If you define all initial variables as outputs you get this simple correspondence

See the updated document 403TripleCart_reply.mw

@jackyleerush 

For the dots I uploaded a new document above which uses the Physics package.

You have to expand a bit on your question. What calculation do you want to do? In Maple sets are formed by these paratheses {}. To select an element of a set you can add an index

{1, 2, 3}[3];
                               3

This is how you perform a union in Maple

A := {1, 2, 3};
B := {4, 5, 6};
A union B;
                         A := {1, 2, 3}

                         B := {4, 5, 6}

                       {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6}

A[3];
                               3

@acer 

The technique that you described is what I was looking for. The use of the colon makes a huge difference.

I can now quite easily see what I suspected. Neither collect_and_recurse nor common_factors return the original expression.

(a + b)*(c + d)+ (e + f)*(g + h)

This also gives more insight in a related question from @sursumCorda (without analysing whether the two mentionned procedures are designed to spot a common factor that only differs in sign. It would be nice if simplify could do this).

Thank you for the answer!

I am interested in tracing Maple library procedures. Here is a example where I tried do understand why Maple does not return the orginal expression.

restart;
trace(`simplify/size`);
(a + b)*(c + d)+ (e + f)*(g + h);
expand(%);
simplify(%);

I assume that the simplification happens in `simplify/size` but where exactly is unclear. I could now trace all the procedures that `simplify/size` potentially calls or I could apply a local printlevel (if that exists).
I tried

trace(`simplify/size`,printlevel=100);

@Joe Riel 

On a note book:

• Start Maple (2k internal display in my case with 125% font scaling) and create a document.
• Connect external Monitor with different scaling (4k in my case with 150% font scaling)
• Try to close the document (Crtl-F4) with changes that are not saved
  

• Open the the laptop (display is duplicated on both monitors). On both monitors the dialouge is back to normal
  

• Close save dialouge and notebook
• Close document (now on external monitor)
  

When both monitors are  set with the same scaling, clipping does not manifest.

My conclusion: Unless the Java virtual machine can handle scaling changes, this effect will not dissapear.