4 Views
top of page
Calculators
Public·8 members
I have a list and I intend to extract 4° value and get the numerator.
18 Views
evaluating definite integrals involving abs(), sin, and exponent
I was using my Classpad fx-cg500 to evaluate the following expression which was a FRQ for AP Calc AB:
integral(0, 3.14, abs(sin(x^1.5))
This operation will take minutes to return an answer. I tried it on Casio fx-cg50 and it took only a few seconds. The fx-cg500 is supposedly the flagship of Casio's calculators. Casio has got to improve this problem or it is entirely useless on a test.
Meanwhile, does anyone know of a way to get around this slowness problem?
Thanks.
50 Views
James Chen
2 days ago
Yes, that is exactly what I discovered too. I hope the R&D team will come up with a fix soon because i ran into this situation more than once where i had to hit the brake to get an answer. I have both the classpad and Nspire CX II CAS. But the classpad user interface is so much user friendly. I just hope it can perform a little faster than it is currently. Is Casio working on a next generation CAS model?
Math Mapping Unit 3 - Stream Available
Feel free to log in and listen in as Mike takes us through Midweek Math Mapping, an independent eight-part series designed to take teachers through the Algebra 1 curriculum from IM K–12 Math™ by Illustrative Mathematics®️. Each session's participants will discuss the unit’s big ideas, map out the lesson sequence to the current School Year Calendar, and explore activities supported by Casio calculator technology.
Midweek Math Mapping Unpacking IM Unit 3
Tuesday, October 15 · 3:30 – 6:00pm
Time zone: America/New_York
Google Meet joining info
Video call link: https://meet.google.com/bfz-zwbi-jvt
23 Views
Members
Casio Staff
Casio Staff
Contributor
bottom of page
When you run numerator(lfparc[4]) the calculator is treating lfparc[4] as an unsimplified symbolic expression instead of a clean numeric value, so it returns a symbolic expansion of the numerator... causing the result you saw originally. I suspect the manual input works because the computation bypasses symbolic complexity. As an untested hypothesis, we might be able to get around this issue using simplify() before numerator() to avoid the issue we are seeing with symbolic expansion. I'm not very well versed with the fx-CG500 so I hope this response will help you as you investigate future computations.