[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #37613] Octave precision/accuracy is much lower for quadgk

[Marco Caliari]

Follow-up Comment #3, bug #37613 (project octave):

Dear David,

maybe the key is in the word "arguments": you took the length of subintervals
as arguments (and in the case [0,inf) there is always a subinterval of
infinite length), but in the paper the arguments are the evaluation points for
the integrand (see, for instance, the third line in p.4). Since inf is never
an evaluation point, the distance between "arguments" is never infinite.
This would require some work on the code...

Marco

    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?37613>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/