Slashdot Mirror


Use of Math Languages and Packages in Research?

CEHT asks: "As a research programmer at the university, I have encountered numerous times when I need to choose which language(s) or package(s) to use for different projects. Tradeoffs and performance issues have to be considered: results from one package may be more compatible with the data from other researchers, another package may find the solution faster and use less resources, and so forth. Maple, Matlab, Magma, and Mathematica are among the most well-known packages. Libraries such as IMSL is also popular. Of course, there are smaller (and mostly free) packages that tend to target specific types of problem, such as LiDIA, Singular, and LAPACK. The question is, how useful are these [and other] math packages? Do researchers use only one or two packages for most of their projects? Or do people like to mix things a little by pulling the strength of different packages together to solve a math problem? If not, do researchers write C/C++ programs and use GMP or Matpack to solve math problems?"

7 of 454 comments (clear)

  1. Fortran by luzrek · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In Experimental Nuclear Physics (ENP) there is a healthy mix of Fortran , C, and C++ (and some others). There is a healthy schepticism of "black box" programs and libraries so programs like Mathematica and Mathlab are pretty much not used. Also, most of the problems are pretty specific (and time consumming to run) so everyone seems to run specialized code (Example: Radware is very popular in Nuclear Spectroscophy). Of course it helps that most ENP's are pretty competant with computers and electronics (amoung other things).

    --

    Galium Arsenide is the material of the future, and always will be.

  2. age-old answer: it depends by coult · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I'm a research mathematician, and I use lots of tools:

    matlab for design prototypes of numerical algorithms and for visualizing data.

    mathematica for doing messy algebra/calculus/differential equations.

    my own c/c++ code, with a lapack backend, for doing large-scale computations (matlab and mathematica are too slow for big computations).
    So, the answer is e) all of the above!

    --

    All is Number -Pythagoras.

  3. Perl Data Language by sleepingsquirrel · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Let's not forget about PDL, the Perl Data Language. Think of Matlab combined with the goodness (i.e. CPAN packages) of perl.

  4. Inexact floating point calculations... by $$$$$exyGal · · Score: 3, Interesting
    A general question. With some programming languages... floating point is by its nature inexact. It is probably best if you imagined that after every floating point operation, a little demon came in and added or subtracted a tiny number to fuzz the low order bits of your result. (I quoted that from here).

    Do any of the listed tools/languages take care of this problem for me? I understand the nature of the problem, but it is still very frustrating. What do the "pure" math programming languages do with this issue?

    --sex

    --
    Very popular slashdot journal for adul
  5. Other trade offs by briancnorton · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The trade offs are a lot more than you mentioned. If you are doing MATHEMATICAL research, Mathematica AFAIK has the most extensive capabilities for expansion and programmability. If you are doing somethign like environmental modelling or complex systems analysis, then something like Matlab may be more important.

    I am not able to articulate this well, but the type of research you are doing is MUCH more important of a consideration than computation speed or resource consumption. If you need supercomputer time, then you had better ask the admin what you need to use. I know a bunch of people that do environmental modelling, and I have never seen or heard of anybody writing their own C++ to do it. Researchers GENERALLY have better things to do than re-invent wheels.

    --

    People who think they know everything really piss off those of us that actually do.

  6. Re:Octave by decoutt · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Octave is a nice MATLAB clone, developed from chemical engineers in the beginning, but now used extensively in virtually any area that math is usefull.

    Many packages have their open source counterparts: Octave for MATLAB, R-system for SPLUS (statistics algebra system), and so forth. But IMHO you raise another issue: you can use each of these packages to do whatever calculations you want, since all of them are extended in the C/Fortran end, i.e. they can use programs written in these languages. Custom code is readily integrated. And above all, the GNU Scientific Library. If you don't like or you don't trust the numerical solvers integrated in MATLAB, you can investigate the source in the GSL.

    And yes, you can use all of these together. So, what is the question again?

    --
    .sig
  7. depends, or, if you have to ask slashdot... by foog · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You're talking about two different classes of software: "numerical linear algebra packages" and "computer algebra systems". Maple and Mathematica are the latter, Matlab is the former. I don't know about Magma.

    Hardcore numerical programmers use LINPACK/LAPACK with platform-optimized BLAS (this latter is often commercial, or at least proprietary to the platform vendor) directly from Fortran. They usually use modern commercial Fortran 90 or Fortran 95 compilers, too.

    On numerical linear algebra stuff where you aren't going to recruit and pay a Fortran programmer with a PhD in applied mathematics, most sane people use Matlab or GNU Octave or one of the many other Matlab clones. A lot of people like Numerical Python, if I had a big new project to do, I'd seriously consider it.

    Yes, crazy "researchers" who don't want to learn Fortran and think Matlab is too slow or too expensive will write numerical code in C++. Some of them do fine work, too.

    Excel and other spreadsheets are fine for small bits of numerical analysis, too. Don't turn up your nose at 'em, you can email your boss your whole analysis and he doesn't have to learn Matlab to do anything with it. Excel is also slowly replacing Qbasic as the computing lingua franca of the Amateur Radio/hobbyist-electronics community.

    The class of people who just doodle out the singular integral equations for the airfoil design they're brainstorming seem to like Mathematica a lot. I wish I were more like that. Maxima is seeing a renaissance now that its licensing and distribution issues are cleared up (it's GPL now). I should check it out. There's also GNU (Emacs) Calc, which I use regularly as an RPN desktop calculator. It is actually much more powerful than that and will do all kinds of HP-calculator-style graphing and computer algebra with a liberal sprinkling of Mathematica-style syntax, but I don't use those features much, because they're wicked slow.