Re: [sympy] Re: Gsoc Proposal review

I have made the document visible to viewers again, I would again like to request everyone to review the same. Regards Arnab Nandi On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 at 23:17, Shishir Kushwaha wrote: > I made the access restricted so no one could edit your proposal but people > won't be able to view the proposa

[sympy] Re: Gsoc Proposal review

Just to clarify the above linked doc is the final draft for the proposal, I apologise to send repeated mails here as my mails took more than 48 hours to approve so I sent multiple ones. On Monday 1 April 2024 at 18:19:11 UTC+5:30 ARNAB NANDI wrote: > Hello everyone I am Arnab Nandi, I have been

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC: Benchmark Project Questions

Thanks, I almost missed that. On Monday, April 1, 2024 at 9:52:22 PM UTC-5 samithkar...@gmail.com wrote: > you have missed the contributions part, I guess. > > On Monday, April 1, 2024 at 11:43:05 PM UTC+5:30 samm...@gmail.com wrote: > >> I’m working on integrating this into my proposal right now

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC: Benchmark Project Questions

you have missed the contributions part, I guess. On Monday, April 1, 2024 at 11:43:05 PM UTC+5:30 samm...@gmail.com wrote: > I’m working on integrating this into my proposal right now. Feedback > would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! > Link: GSOC 2024 - Google Docs >

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC: Benchmark Project Questions

I’m working on integrating this into my proposal right now. Feedback would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Link: GSOC 2024 - Google Docs On Monday, April 1, 2024 at 4:37:37 AM UTC-5 asme...@gmail.com wrote

[sympy] Re: Gsoc Proposal review

I made the access restricted so no one could edit your proposal but people won't be able to view the proposal as well. I would suggest you change the access to view only. I am sorry if your intentions were different with the access you had given . On Monday 1 April 2024 at 22:46:30 UTC+5:30 Shi

[sympy] Re: Gsoc Proposal review

I was able to make the access restricted so I did that. I am sorry if you had meant to have open access for some reason. On Monday 1 April 2024 at 22:46:30 UTC+5:30 Shishir Kushwaha wrote: > Hey Arnab, the link is currently shared in editing mode, kindly change > that or someone might mess wit

[sympy] Re: Gsoc Proposal review

Hey Arnab, the link is currently shared in editing mode, kindly change that or someone might mess with your project accidentally. ___ Shishir On Monday 1 April 2024 at 18:19:11 UTC+5:30 arnabna...@gmail.com wrote: > Hello everyone I am Arnab Nandi, I have been contributing to sympy since

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC: Pauli string algebra and fast decomposition routine

That's might be true. I recently found that sympy also started to support basic quantum computation routines. However, the coverage is narrow comparing to the other frameworks. I thought It would be useful for the researchers to work with Hamiltonian, but it is true that my proposal is more likely

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC: Benchmark Project Questions

I've updated the ideas page with a link to an issue that discusses some ways that benchmarks on GitHub Actions could be improved. Aaron Meurer On Mon, Apr 1, 2024 at 2:35 AM Sam Lubelsky wrote: > Yeah, I see no good reason for why the benchmark results show the Master > vs previous release. Th

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC: Benchmark Project Questions

Yeah, I see no good reason for why the benchmark results show the Master vs previous release. That information does not seem relevant to the PR and I would bet it's causing people to ignore the benchmark when it is actually saying something useful. I think that Master vs previous release sect

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC: Benchmark Project Questions

I agree with this. The usability of the current benchmarking output needs to be improved a lot. Ideally, it should work in a way that people are actually alerted to real performance regressions, and not bothered if there aren't any performance regressions. Another issue is that the PR benchmarks c

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC: Benchmark Project Questions

This is my opinion, not sure if it is shared, but I don't think anyone uses the information that is displayed on the pull request. This isn't because the information isn't accurate or informative, but because of how and when it is presented. I haven't looked at all pull requests, of course, but I d

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC: Benchmark Project Questions

Is there any specific problems with the current pull request benchmarking system that this project should address? On Sunday, March 31, 2024 at 1:41:58 PM UTC-5 moore...@gmail.com wrote: > HI Sam, > > I think that idea could be a bit outdated. I'm not sure if the text was > updated for this year

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC: Benchmark Project Questions

HI Sam, I think that idea could be a bit outdated. I'm not sure if the text was updated for this year. If it was, then someone else can speak up about it. I think that improving our sympy_benchmarks repository with more and better benchmarks and making the benchmarking system that we have setup w

[sympy] Re: GSOC: Benchmark Project Questions

Sorry if it is kinda intimidating that I put so many questions. I really just need the answer to the first one to make my proposal. I know I am a little late to GSOC, but I've really enjoyed getting to know the Sympy community a little bit in this past week and I am committed to putting toget

[sympy] Re: GSOC: Pauli string algebra and fast decomposition routine

I think that it is fairly a good proposal. However, the only problems are that we may not be familiar with the physics, or quantum computation, or we may not have clear roadmap whether the algorithm is significantly necessary for the module, However, if you already have self-motivated knowledge

[sympy] Re: GSoC prospect interest and a potential issue

I don't think it is an issue with its consistency. This happens when you're using jupyter notebook or google colab. I am not sure if my wording is correct but only the last value returned in a code block is printed by the notebook. A print statement is treated differently as it prints the value

[sympy] Re: GSOC: Symbolic Control Systems

Hi Donald, Good to hear you enjoyed using SymPy and like to contribute back. I've updated the link in the GSoC idea. Since a few years, it is also possible to do a longer GSoC project. The minimum project span is 175 hours, which you can spread across 12 weeks and the maximum project span is 3

[sympy] Re: Gsoc' 23

Hello Everyone, I am Mihir Kumar Singh, and Physics undergrad from India. I have a good understanding of Physics and programming (C++, Python and JS). I am excied to see the project ideas of GSOC-22 and would like to contribute to any of the following ideas: - Classical Mechanics: Efficient

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC Proposal

While submitting the GSOC Proposal it was mentioned to select whether the project is Large or medium size. Also it was mentioned to get approval for this thing with the organization first otherwise it may result in rejection of the proposal. (On the ideas page(in the probability section), it was

[sympy] Re: GSOC'22 Project Discussion: Bond Graph tools

Also if the mentor can review the PR, That would be great Link to PR: Making Expr.pow type consistent by sympify the returned ints by airpods69 · Pull Request #23378 · sympy/sympy (github.com) On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 1:49:23 AM UTC+5:30 Varenya

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC Proposal

Thanks a lot for your reply Sir Oscar Benjamin, you have always helped me in problems. It's okay if you will not be able to mentor the project. I was interested in adding these features after I saw them on the Ideas list and mailed sir Gagandeep regarding the same and everything seemed to be okay a

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC Proposal

Hi Kuldeep, I see that there is a proposal for working on probability in the ideas page: https://github.com/sympy/sympy/wiki/GSoC-Ideas#probability It is suggested there that Gagandeep Singh or Smit Lunagariya are potential mentors. I have not seen much involvement from either of these contributo

[sympy] Re: GSOC Proposal

Thanks Anutosh for telling me about this thing that patch must be code-related. Few days ago I created a PR which might help me to understand and complete one of the task included in GSOC in future if I am selected. https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/23346 I think this could satisfy the patch re

[sympy] Re: GSOC Proposal

Hello Kuldeep, I was going through your proposal , because I realize you haven't yet received any reviews on your proposal yet and also because submission deadline is approaching . I also read something about sympy's patch requirement for being accepted on the application template wiki couple

[sympy] Re: GSOC Proposal

Hello SymPy Community, I completed writing my proposal although I was waiting if someone could reply as a suggestion or something like the idea suggested can be implemented in SymPy, *yet no one replied* 😢* as if the idea is not okay but I was hoping a reply even for that* (earlier in the discus

Re: [sympy] Re: GSoC 2022:Simplex method for linear programming.

> Den tors 14 apr. 2022 19:54Qijia Liu skrev: >> >> SciPy has simplex method implemented. Do we need to re-implement it in SymPy? >> On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 at 07:37, Oscar Gustafsson wrote: > > There are two (I think, at least one) PRs that are not merged that does this. > So it would be better to

Re: [sympy] Re: GSoC 2022:Simplex method for linear programming.

On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 at 18:54, Qijia Liu wrote: > > SciPy has simplex method implemented. Do we need to re-implement it in SymPy? The SciPy implementation only works for floats. It should be possible to solve linear programming problems at least using exact rational numbers. Something like this is

Re: [sympy] Re: GSoC 2022:Simplex method for linear programming.

There are two (I think, at least one) PRs that are not merged that does this. So it would be better to sort one of those out. Iirc there is limiterd work left, like documentation and testing. BR Oscar Den tors 14 apr. 2022 19:54Qijia Liu skrev: > SciPy has simplex method implemented. Do we need

[sympy] Re: GSoC 2022:Simplex method for linear programming.

SciPy has simplex method implemented. Do we need to re-implement it in SymPy? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sympy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To vi

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC 22' Project Discussion : Improving Series Expansions and Limit Computations

If I understand correctly then, the timeline is something that would be decided on after you are selected (if you are) and assigned a mentor, since it would also depend on the mentor's availability. So I wouldn't worry about it for now, although it's definitely helpful to note your plans in your pr

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC 22' Project Discussion : Improving Series Expansions and Limit Computations

Hello Aaron, I hope you're doing well . I've tried to keep it simple and standard as how it has been since past couple years . But just for your information the Google open source blog says - " *You can spread the project out over a longer period of time and you can even switch to a longer tim

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC 22' Project Discussion : Improving Series Expansions and Limit Computations

On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 6:46 PM be19b037 Anutosh Surendra Bhat wrote: > > Hello All, > > This is Anutosh here again . I wanted to inform that My Gsoc proposal > (Improving series Expansions and Limit Computations) is almost about > complete. I've received a basic review from the potential Mentor

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC Idea and Query

Thank you Sir Alan for telling me about the Asymptote software, it surely is better than matplotlib(it would have been best if the scripting language was python), I will see if I could use that in visualizing Random Walk and Noise Processes : ) No Sir @Peter, this is different from what I am tr

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC Idea and Query

As I said, I have never uded this stats module, hence no idea what is does. There is a module lmfit, which I have played around with a very little bit. It is about fitting noisy data to some 'curve'. No idea if this is similar to what you want to do. On Sun 3. Apr 2022 at 04:16, Kuldeep Borkar wr

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC Idea and Query

Thank you for the response Sir, 1. It's just the opposite, I am not even trying to beat matplotlib, I am just trying to develop what's already there in SymPy . In SymPy presently the plots are rendered using matplotlib as a backend. If Random Walk is being implemented in SymPy user would like to

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC Idea and Query

I have never used sympy statistics, hence my comments may be without any use. 1. With matplotlib there is an excellent visualisation library available. Hard for me to see, how you can beat it. 2. There is a library sdeint available, which numerically integrates Ito or Stratchonovich stochastic di

[sympy] Re: GSOC Idea and Query

Hello SymPy Community, Few days ago, I was having a discussion regarding my GSOC Project Idea with this year's mentor for the Probability Section and on my idea regarding implementation of noise processes I came up with the suggestion of adding a method to Visualize the noise processes, also th

[sympy] Re: GSOC Ideas in Physics Control

Hi SymPy community , I have surfed over the ideas that I mentioned previously and started drafting the backbone of my proposal .I would be glad if mentors ,specially Jason Moore would review them, so that I can progress towards making the proposal more concrete .All suggestions and comments are

[sympy] Re: GSOC 22' Project Discussion : Improving Series Expansions and Limit Computations

Hello All, This is Anutosh Bhat here . I have recently created a page for all my fellow contributors who plan to participate in *Google Summer of Code 22' (*GSoC 2022 Current Applications · sympy/sympy Wiki (github.com) ) .

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC proposal feedback (Refactor the ODE module and make it fast)

Hi Mohit, Ok great, I suspected this was the idea but it was not so clear from the proposal. I think it is a good move forward in creating a better structured ODE solver. It will make it easier to debug and improve individual solvers and gives a good structure to the overall DE solver. Best

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC proposal feedback (Refactor the ODE module and make it fast)

Hi Nijso, Thanks for the feedback. Basic Idea is to implement an independent class for each solver and then from master ode.py we will just iterate and check if it matches the solver it will return the solution. Here is the issue link where Oscar suggested this approach : Link

[sympy] Re: GSoC Proposal Feedback 2021

if there is no chance of getting accepted since i just have one pull-request, I would appreciate if somebody tell me. On Friday, April 2, 2021 at 2:21:40 PM UTC+2 B Sh wrote: > > Hello, > Would you please provide feedback as soon as possible to my proposal >

[sympy] Re: GSOC proposal feedback (Refactor the ODE module and make it fast)

Hi Mohit, I looked at your proposal. It is not clear to me what the result of the refactoring would be in terms of the algorithmic implementation or the benefits to the ODE solver. Is it the idea to have independent classes and therefore solvers for each of the ODE solvers and classifiers, that

[sympy] Re: GSoc Idea Discussion

can anyone tell me if Linear Programming with simplex method be a valid GSoC idea for this year. https://github.com/sympy/sympy/issues/20391 On Tuesday, 16 March 2021 at 23:06:13 UTC+5:30 Mayank Raj wrote: > hello everyone, > I'd like to know if #20391 Linear Programming with simplex method can

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC 2021 Introduction

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 at 16:53, Marvin Prakash wrote: > > Could someone please help me regarding the further process so that i can > start contributing. There is a guid to contributing here: https://github.com/sympy/sympy/wiki/introduction-to-contributing Oscar -- You received this message bec

[sympy] Re: GSOC 2021 Introduction

Could someone please help me regarding the further process so that i can start contributing. On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 6:02:04 PM UTC+5:30 Marvin Prakash wrote: > Hi SymPy, > > My name is Marvin V. Prakash. I am a third year student in CSE BTech + > MTech/M.S. Program from Jawaharlal Neh

[sympy] Re: GSoC Idea Discussion

Hi, It would be great if any possible mentors could provide their input on this. Regards, Sidharth (0sidharth) On Saturday, February 13, 2021 at 10:54:34 AM UTC+5:30 Sidharth wrote: > Hello SymPy Community! > > I was interested in a few ideas in the GSoC Ideas >

Re: [sympy] Re: Gsoc Idea Discussion

Hi, You may go through this link, https://github.com/sympy/sympy/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Astats and previous year's GSoC reports, https://github.com/sympy/sympy/wiki/GSoC-2020-Report-Smit-Lunagariya:-Improving-and-Extending-stats-module On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 6:07 PM Kunal Singh wr

[sympy] Re: [GSoC Mentors] Announcing GSoC 2021 with a few changes

I was told that due to COVID-19 outbreak, the number of slots for GSoC 2020 were reduced. I would like to know if a similar thing will happen in GSoC 2021, or will the slots be increased to accommodate more small projects. Prakhar On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 12:38:13 AM UTC+5:30 moore...@

[sympy] Re: GSoC Students Announced

Congratulations everybody and good luck for the projects! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sympy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on

[sympy] Re: GSoC 2020 proposal Improving Assumptions Mo

> > @Aaron Meurer > Sir, firstly thank you for the feedback. Could you please explain a bit more about how you want to proceed in the satask system? Any issues/PR which is relevant will also be great. Also, Shubham Jha asked me to include SMT features like Linear Real Arithmatic and Linear Int

[sympy] Re: Gsoc 2020 : Implementing better integer factorization algorithms

I have submitted my proposal, but since the deadline is tomorrow and google allows edition the proposal, so i humbly request the mentors to please review my proposal and if there are any improvements that might be needed please let me know. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1y_kLou7NwodV75puX88

[sympy] Re: Gsoc 2020 : Application review for series expansion

Below is the link to my proposal. It would be helpful if the mentors could review it https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HmI-3vhZmj5VylzmtNRTxq0VxWX3lEfF6L_drmkQCtI/edit?usp=sharing On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 10:24:15 AM UTC+5:30, Saanidhya Vats wrote: > > I have attached the proposal below.

[sympy] Re: GSoC 2020: ideas about Efficient Equation of Motion Generation with C++

Hi Community: I have written the first edition draft of my proposal for GSoC 20, please hit me with any comment or feedback. The topic is *Classical Mechanics: Efficient Equation of Motion Generation with C++* https://docs.google.com/document/d/13bsWvbPqdK9w6E-H2QpIhdxiL8Ym5P0yaZE-COIx6k0/edit?

[sympy] Re: GSOC 2020: Series Expansion

Below is the link to my proposal, I request the mentors to review it. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HmI-3vhZmj5VylzmtNRTxq0VxWX3lEfF6L_drmkQCtI/edit?usp=sharing -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. To unsubscribe from this group and

[sympy] Re: GSoC 2020 Idea: Improving SymPy Units

On Friday, 27 March 2020 07:35:41 UTC+1, Anson Biggs wrote: > > Improving Units > > Idea > > I personally use SymPy for engineering and a great way to check myself for > mistakes is checking that the units for my equations are consistent and > compatible. I think that SymPy could greatly benefi

Re: [sympy] Re: gsoc prosopal related to "Creating a rich beam solving system and extending continuum mechanics module"

Thank you, Sir, I'll get back to you with updated proposal and contributions. On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 5:54 AM Jason Moore wrote: > Harsha, > > You've got a lot of good ideas in your proposal. Here are some quick > comments: > > - The scope is way too large. You have too many different things. Br

Re: [sympy] Re: gsoc prosopal related to "Creating a rich beam solving system and extending continuum mechanics module"

Harsha, You've got a lot of good ideas in your proposal. Here are some quick comments: - The scope is way too large. You have too many different things. Bring the scope down to a couple of things. - Some of the items are likely not appropriate for a symbolic library. - I like that you have code s

Re: [sympy] Re: gsoc prosopal related to "Creating a rich beam solving system and extending continuum mechanics module"

I request any mentor to take a look and suggest any possible improvements to my proposal . On Mon, 23 Mar, 2020, 7:03 PM harsha gudupudi, wrote: > Dear GSoc Mentors, >>I am resending you draft of my proposal for GSoC-2020 here >>

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC 2020 draft application

Sure sir , apologies for the late reply , but i've opened a thread on the sympy forum and am ready to start working on it . I am opening an issue on SymEngine also for the same . If there is any other sort of feedback or guidance I am all ears. This is with reference to the mail I received from yo

[sympy] Re: GSOC 2020 draft application

Hi Manik, The most urgent issue in MatchPy for C++ is to support C++20's coroutines. C++20 has introduced coroutines, which work approximately like Python's *yield* (i.e. the function returns a value without deallocating the function memory). MatchPy uses a lot of generators, MatchPyCpp instead

[sympy] Re: GSOC 2020: Series Expansion

Initially I will start by solving issues related to series module. I have gone through various issues and found that limit of some expressions is giving incorrect result in various examples, I am currently working on it and will later on jump to other subtopics of the series module. It would be

[sympy] Re: GSOC 2020 Introduction

After observing what has been already done, i would like to develop 2d beams more and then start working on 3d beam class. If time permits, i would also like to develop the truss class as well. Here's my to do list: - Adding more functions to 2D beam class for various properties - Develop

[sympy] Re: GSOC Introduction

I have created the first draft of my proposal for "Optimising floating-point expressions", https://docs.google.com/document/d/12eBRsCbZkBfh4pj2MAaurdMWx6nd1MTYxXTmlRKriJ8/edit?usp=sharing Mentors, please suggest changes. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Gro

[sympy] Re: GSOC Introduction

Herbie also uses heuristic search estimates and localize error using sampled points. Same as in Fu et al, Herbie applies a database of rules and follows an algorithm that recursively rewrites candidate programs. I have attached a pdf that includes the rules that have to there in the database.

[sympy] Re: GSOC Introduction

The paper about Herbie is very interesting. Since SymPy is primarily symbolic it would work well at producing expressions via Herbie that would perform well -- an optimized expression for evaluation. It reminds me a little of the Fu-heuristics that are used for trigonometric simplifications. /c

[sympy] Re: GSOC Introduction

The current evalf() is used to evaluate a numerical expression into a floating-point number using an arbitrary precision library mpmath. What I want to do is to get the best answer for different ranges that varies from (-inf, inf) without increasing precision. for example: expr1 = (x + 1)**0.5 -

Re: [sympy] Re: GSOC Introduction

It's not clear to me what problem your proposal is intending to solve. In what way is it different from the current evalf algorithm/results? -- Oscar On Wed, 11 Mar 2020 at 22:48, Shubham thorat wrote: > > This is how I have divided the tasks: > The algorithm is defined in this paper: > https:/

[sympy] Re: GSOC Introduction

This is how I have divided the tasks: The algorithm is defined in this paper: https://herbie.uwplse.org/pldi15-paper.pdf 1. Error Calculation on sampling points - Find the best-accepted level of precision so we calculate the actual correctly up to 64 bits by increasing the precis

[sympy] Re: Gsoc 2020 mentor help required

Hi! Can I please request to review my proposal and advise. Would appreciate if you can provide some feedback in case proposal is not appropriate. Thanka\Vishakha On Tuesday, March 10, 2020 at 10:14:33 PM UTC+5:30, VISHAKHA NARANG wrote: > > Dear Sir, > > I am Vishakha Narang, an undergraduate

[sympy] Re: Gsoc 2020 : Implementing better integer factorization algorithms

I have started making my proposal for the GSOC. This is the link https://docs.google.com/document/d/1y_kLou7NwodV75puX88Lihdkx63sw5aQEc1zVuh8_NM/edit?usp=sharing Please review my proposal and suggest any improvements. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

[sympy] Re: GSOC Introduction

I am referring the given links for optimizing floating-point expressions https://herbie.uwplse.org/ https://ece.uwaterloo.ca/~dwharder/NumericalAnalysis/02Numerics/Double/paper.pdf *T**o Do* - *1]* *databases of rules **to find rearrangements*(the database can be updated by u

[sympy] Re: GSOC 2020 Stats module and Rough Timeline

Hi Sumit, Happy to see your interest and rough timeline you have prepared. Please go through each and every link, given in the idea list and start working on easy fix issues and/or any enhancement part for the project to understand the codebase. It will help you to understand the bottleneck of t

[sympy] Re: Gsoc 2020 : Implementing better integer factorization algorithms

Hi, I think that it is enough work for a summer of code (maybe even more than enough). It would be a good addition to the prime testing and factorization modules of SymPy. Kalevi Suominen On Tuesday, February 25, 2020 at 10:02:07 PM UTC+2, ABHINAV ANAND wrote: > > Hey, i hope the work done on

[sympy] Re: Gsoc 2020 : Implementing better integer factorization algorithms

Hey, i hope the work done on the referenced pr is good. I wanted to confirm that the idea that i gave can be part of Gsoc this year. I mean if it is enough work for the summer and withn the scope of sympy. If yes then i will start making a formal proposal and improve it based on your opinions,

[sympy] Re: Gsoc 2020 : Implementing better integer factorization algorithms

Hi, Yes, those algorithms are relevant to SymPy. For the first one, you might be interested in completing this PR: https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/2449. It should be possible to make it work also with finite fields and rings. Kalevi Suominen On Sunday, February 16, 2020 at 7:52:26 PM UTC

Re: [sympy] Re: Gsoc Project idea " Efficient Equation of Motion Generation with Python" discussion.

I don't see any connection between the original post and your reply but... My understanding is that the Coppersmith Winograd algorithm is not really used anywhere: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galactic_algorithm I'm not sure if that is the same algorithm. The paper you cite looks like an earlier

[sympy] Re: Gsoc Project idea " Efficient Equation of Motion Generation with Python" discussion.

This looks like an old topic, but I stumbled across the Coppersmith-Winograd algorithm so I'm going to reply over this https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747717108800132 it was quite difficult to understand the paper, but I'd suspect that the coppersmith algorithm is about 'appro

Re: [sympy] Re: GSoC 2020

Hi S.Y. Lee, I didn't see this message until now. I think you would definitely be good as a mentor. It's not much different from what you already do with helping people with pull requests, except you would be helping one person with a project, and making sure they keep on track for their timeline,

[sympy] Re: GSoC 2020

Hello, I have updated the GSoC idea page for the idea prompt of the matrices module, because I find that there are a lot of moderate-difficulty maintenance problems in the module that can be achievable by with a regular amount of time and effort devoted. But since I haven't participated in GS

Re: 答复: [sympy] Re: Gsoc 2019 proposal on Sympy:Tensor core

ves a general description of it and the parameters. Some of them contain >>>> as well examples for guidance. Here is an example.(link >>>> <https://github.com/sympy/sympy/blob/d474418cf4475139d66da7d474012f366d74b628/sympy/tensor/tensor.py#L113-L131> >&

Re: 答复: [sympy] Re: Gsoc 2019 proposal on Sympy:Tensor core

t;>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 发送自 Windows 10 版邮件应用 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 发件人: Rahul Prajapati >>>> 发送时间: 2019年4月8日 12:18 >>>> 收件人: sympy >>>> 主题: [sympy] Re: Gsoc 2019

Re: [sympy] Re: Gsoc 2019 proposal on Sympy:Tensor core

and the parameters. Some of them contain >>>> as well examples for guidance. Here is an example.(link >>>> <https://github.com/sympy/sympy/blob/d474418cf4475139d66da7d474012f366d74b628/sympy/tensor/tensor.py#L113-L131> >>>> ) >>>> >>&g

Re: 答复: [sympy] Re: Gsoc 2019 proposal on Sympy:Tensor core

;>> >>> >>> 发送自 Windows 10 版邮件 <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986>应用 >>> >>> >>> >>> *发件人: *Rahul Prajapati >>> *发送时间: *2019年4月8日 12:18 >>> *收件人: *sympy >>> *主题: *[sympy] Re: Gsoc 20

Re: 答复: [sympy] Re: Gsoc 2019 proposal on Sympy:Tensor core

>> >> 发送自 Windows 10 版邮件 <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986>应用 >> >> >> >> *发件人: *Rahul Prajapati >> *发送时间: *2019年4月8日 12:18 >> *收件人: *sympy >> *主题: *[sympy] Re: Gsoc 2019 proposal on Sympy:Tensor core >> >> >&g

Re: 答复: [sympy] Re: Gsoc 2019 proposal on Sympy:Tensor core

microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986>应用 >> >> >> >> *发件人: *Rahul Prajapati >> *发送时间: *2019年4月8日 12:18 >> *收件人: *sympy >> *主题: *[sympy] Re: Gsoc 2019 proposal on Sympy:Tensor core >> >> >> >> where will i get docstring >>

[sympy] Re: GSoC-19 Proposal : Series and Expansion

here is the google docs link https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VVsYUz96IJd2FmHt9ikg9iAFJQRMrLuUh5uhmtRdZG8/edit On Sunday, April 7, 2019 at 10:24:03 PM UTC+5:30, Nabanita Dash wrote: > > Here is the revised link to my proposal: > https://github.com/sympy/sympy/wiki/GSoC-2019-Proposal-Nabanita-

Re: 答复: [sympy] Re: Gsoc 2019 proposal on Sympy:Tensor core

> > > > *发件人: *Rahul Prajapati > *发送时间: *2019年4月8日 12:18 > *收件人: *sympy > *主题: *[sympy] Re: Gsoc 2019 proposal on Sympy:Tensor core > > > > where will i get docstring > > On Sunday, April 7, 2019 at 11:47:13 PM UTC+5:30, Rahul Prajapati wrote:

答复: [sympy] Re: Gsoc 2019 proposal on Sympy:Tensor core

It is the string between “”” ””” below some classes or functions which gives a general description of it and the parameters. Some of them contain as well examples for guidance. Here is an example.(link) 发送自 Windows 10 版邮件应用 发件人: Rahul Prajapati 发送时间: 2019年4月8日 12:18 收件人: sympy 主题: [sympy] Re

[sympy] Re: Gsoc 2019 proposal on Sympy:Tensor core

where will i get docstring On Sunday, April 7, 2019 at 11:47:13 PM UTC+5:30, Rahul Prajapati wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > I am a Rahul, 3nd year IT undergraduate from CBPGEC Jaffarpur(affiliate by > GGSIPU), India. In this summer,i am interested to work with GSOC 2019. I > want to work on "L

[sympy] Re: Gsoc 2019 proposal on Sympy:Tensor core

Hello Rahul, Firstly I have to say that I am also new to the community so my explication may not be 100% correct. However, as I have been working on this module recently, I hope that I can give you a hand.Check out https://github.com/sympy/sympy/wiki/GSoC-2019-Student-Instructions if you haven

[sympy] Re: GSoC-19 Proposal : Series and Expansion

Here is the revised link to my proposal: https://github.com/sympy/sympy/wiki/GSoC-2019-Proposal-Nabanita-Dash:Series:Improving-ring_series,fps-and-limits On Sunday, April 7, 2019 at 9:59:51 AM UTC+5:30, Nabanita Dash wrote: > > I have updated my proposal.Anyone please give a look > > On Wednesday

[sympy] Re: GSOC 19: Code Generation

I've added some drafts at https://anpandey.github.io/gsoc/gsoc-application.html with a pdf version at anpandey.github.io/gsoc/gsoc-application.pdf if anybody would like to look at them. On Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 7:44:44 PM UTC-5, Ankit Pandey wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > I am a third year s

[sympy] Re: GSoC-19 Proposal : Series and Expansion

I have updated my proposal.Anyone please give a look On Wednesday, April 3, 2019 at 7:06:41 AM UTC+5:30, Nabanita Dash wrote: > > No,not yet.I haven't yet completely implemented > > On Wednesday, April 3, 2019 at 4:18:12 AM UTC+5:30, Arif Ahmed wrote: >> >> Seems much better now. I see you have a

Re: [sympy] Re: GSoC 2019 Initial Project Proposal - Assumptions

Hi everyone, Since the deadline is approaching, I have submitted the current version of my proposal at *GSoC'*s website. Please take a look at my proposal at wiki

Re: [sympy] Re: GSoC 2019 Initial Project Proposal - Assumptions

Hi everyone, Since the deadline is approaching, I have submitted the current version of my proposal at *GSoC'*s website. Please take a look at my proposal at wiki . I would be happy to get further s

[sympy] Re: GSoC'19 : Continuum mechanics Idea proposal

I have made a draft proposal here . I will be finishing it soon. Looking forward to any feedback or suggestions. Thanks! Ishan Joshi -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the

Re: [sympy] Re: GSoC 2019 Initial Project Proposal - Assumptions

Hi Aaron, I have made updates to the initial draft as suggested. Kindly take a look at it. Thanks, Shubham On Tuesday, April 2, 2019 at 6:13:52 AM UTC+5:30, skjh...@gmail.com wrote: > > Hi Aaron, > > Thanks for replying. I am still researching on SMT solvers and possible > approaches of impl

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >