1 Introduction

This report gives the result of running the computer algebra independent integration problems (Lite version) obtained from from https://rulebasedintegration.org.

The following versions of Mathematica were tested.

  1. Version 14.1 (August 1, 2024) (on windows 10, 64 bit)
  2. Version 14 (January 9, 2024) (on windows 10, 64 bit)
  3. Version 13.3 (July 2023) (on windows 10, 64 bit)
  4. Version 12.3.1 (on windows 10, 64 bit)
  5. Version 12.1 (on windows 10, 64 bit)
  6. Version 12 (on windows 10, 64 bit)
  7. Version 11.3 (on windows 7, 64 bit)
  8. Version 11.2 (on windows 7, 64 bit)
  9. Version 10.3 (on windows 7, 64 bit)
  10. Version 9 (on windows 7, 64 bit)
  11. Version 8 (on windows 7, 64 bit)
  12. Version 7 (on windows 7, 64 bit)
  13. Version 6.0.1 (on windows 7, 64 bit)
  14. Version 5.2 (on windows 7, 64 bit)

The command AboluteTiming[] was used in Mathematica to obtain the CPU time.

A time limit of 3 minutes is used for all integrals in each CAS. If the integration does not complete within this time limit then the integral is considered to have failed.

The table below gives additional break down of the grading of quality of the antiderivatives generated by each CAS. The grading is given using the letters A,B,C and F with A being the best quality. The grading is accomplished by comparing the antiderivative generated with the optimal antiderivatives included in the test suite. The following table describes the meaning of these grades.

grade

description

A

Integral was solved and antiderivative is optimal in quality and leaf size.

B

Integral was solved and antiderivative is optimal in quality but leaf size is larger than twice the optimal antiderivatives leaf size.

C

Integral was solved and antiderivative is non-optimal in quality. This can be due to one or more of the following reasons

  1. antiderivative contains a hypergeometric function and the optimal antiderivative does not.
  2. antiderivative contains a special function and the optimal antiderivative does not.
  3. antiderivative contains the imaginary unit and the optimal antiderivative does not.

F

Integral was not solved. Either the integral was returned unevaluated within the time limit, or it timed out, or CAS hanged or crashed or an exception was raised.

Based on the above, the following tables summarizes the grading for each test suite for each version

This table shows the percentage and count of solved and non solved integrals for each version. There are a total of [ 14944 ] integrals in the test suite.

Version percentage solved number solved number failed
14.1 98.715 14752 192
14 98.675 14746 198
13.3 98.675 14746 198
12.3.1 98.588 14733 211
12.1 98.548 14727 217
12 98.555 14728 216
11.3 97.223 14529 415
11.2 97.511 14572 372
10.3 93.395 13957 987
9 92.867 13878 1066
8 91.783 13716 1228
7 91.823 13722 1222
6.0.1 90.645 13546 1398
5.2 88.477 13222 1722
Table 1: Solved percentage over versions

This figure shows the percentage of passed integrals in each version.

pict

This Plot shows the number of A graded result for each version.

pict

This table shows the grading performance for each version.

Version %A %B %C %F
14.1 79.611 (11897) 5.567 (832) 13.537 (2023) 1.285 (192)
14 79.979 (11952) 5.179 (774) 13.517 (2020) 1.325 (198)
13.3 79.865 (11935) 5.333 (797) 13.477 (2014) 1.325 (198)
12.3.1 77.048 (11514) 5.822 (870) 15.719 (2349) 1.412 (211)
12.1 77.001 (11507) 5.795 (866) 15.752 (2354) 1.445 (216)
12 76.807 (11478) 5.989 (895) 15.759 (2355) 1.445 (216)
11.3 75.174 (11234) 7.889 (1179) 14.16 (2116) 2.777 (415)
11.2 75.147 (11230) 7.314 (1093) 15.05 (2249) 2.489 (372)
10.3 71.079 (10622) 7.347 (1098) 14.969 (2237) 6.605 (987)
9 72.022 (10763) 7.02 (1049) 13.825 (2066) 7.133 (1066)
8 70.865 (10590) 6.939 (1037) 13.979 (2089) 8.217 (1228)
7 71.112 (10627) 7.515 (1123) 13.196 (1972) 8.177 (1222)
6.0.1 70.323 (10509) 7.194 (1075) 13.129 (1962) 9.355 (1398)
5.2 68.389 (10220) 7.254 (1084) 12.835 (1918) 11.523 (1722)
Table 2: Performance grading summary table over versions

This figure show the normalized mean leaf size for each version. This was normalized to the size of the optimal result.

pict

This figure show the mean leaf size for each version.

pict

This figure show the median leaf size for each version.

pict

This figure show the mean CPU time (sec) for each version.

pict