fredrikj.net/blog/2023/04/fl…
FLINT furnished with faster FFT: we recently merged Dan Schultz's amazing new small-prime FFT code into FLINT, enabling much faster bignum arithmetic (in some cases 10x faster than GMP).
In case you missed it: FLINT, Antic, Arb, Calcium and Generic-Rings have merged into a single project: what will be FLINT 3.x going forward. The 3.0 release will happen later this year; I'm currently working on debloating this 1 MLOC codebase. github.com/flintlib/flint2
LaTeXML 0.8.7 was just released!
We're ready for #MathML Core.
With gratitude to the wider community, who helped drive another productive year of extending our TeX interpretation fidelity and our LaTeX ecosystem coverage.
Full release notes at:
github.com/brucemiller/LaTeX…
Anyone interested in a full-time job doing FLINT development should get in touch.
I don't have funding at the moment, but given a qualified candidate (skilled with computer algebra *and* C programming), there's a decent chance that funding can be found.
What strikes me about Yitang Zhang's preprint is that there doesn't seem to be any fancy math (I could be wrong about this), just 100 pages of tedious analytic calculations. An interesting candidate for computer verification?
Many proofs in analytic number theory look like this, and I can never quite shake the fear that the author might have dropped a decimal or a sign or a residue somewhere.
Sadly proof assistants are still quite limited when it comes to (complex) analysis, and computer algebra systems suck at handling inequalities. I wish we had proper "computer analysis systems" making computer-verified classical analysis truly routine.
I finally launched CoWasm.org. It's kind of like @emscripten, but built using @ziglang, with first class support for both servers and browsers. The main package is @python 3.11, but there are lots of other fun #webassembly ports hidden inside...
Accepting and rejecting papers is an archaic practice that is terrible for science. It strips peer review of its value & institutionalizes the practice of judging scientists based on where, rather than what, they publish. It's time for this system to go.
elifesciences.org/articles/8…
dlmf.nist.gov/4.13
Finally, DLMF's section about the Lambert W-function has been updated. They now cover the complex branches, with the usual notation, plus the Wright ω and Tree T functions. @corless_rob
Is there a reason why we haven't seen many such formulas before?
(Practically speaking, people mostly care about matrix multiplication over C which is algebraically closed anyway.)