View Single Post
  #17   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-01-2014, 15:45
Ether's Avatar
Ether Ether is offline
systems engineer (retired)
no team
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Rookie Year: 1969
Location: US
Posts: 8,125
Ether has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond reputeEther has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Statistics Quiz#1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Basel A View Post
Maple 17 and Mathematica 9.0 gave the same answer, a very large fraction that evaluates to 0.591634715653168147118256848279....
Thank you.

That confirms the 80-digit arbitrary-precision calc I did with Maxima.

The "very large fraction" has 953 digits in the numerator (and denominator). The first 80 digits of the decimal representation of that fraction are:

Code:
load(distrib)$
fpprec:80$
bfloat(cdf_binomial(671,2000,1/3));

0.59163471565316814711825684827930003268147312930167045093849129098685265637080124
Comparing the above to double-precision calculations:

0.591634715653168.....(Scilab)
0.59163471565317......(Maxima)
0.591634715653171.....(Matlab)
0.591634715653066.....(Octave)
0.59163471565245895...(Python)


... Scilab is the most accurate, Python the least, and Matlab is in the middle of the pack.

If you do the calcs using double-precision in Maple and Mathematica, what result do you get?


Reply With Quote