Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Open Source Math Software For Education?

Posted by timothy on Mon Dec 13, 2004 07:04 PM
from the wading-through-it dept.
Software
Rui Carmo writes "Now here's something you don't get asked every day, but which a friend happens to need for her kids: If you had to suggest Open-Source software for mathematics - somewhere from high-school to freshman level, and not merely for 'pure' mathematics, but also applicable to physics and statistics (the kids are considering going into Applied Maths and Engineering), what would you point people toward, assuming they have access to both Linux and Windows? I know this is a niche thing and that there is nothing out there that even comes close to Wolfram's excellent Mathematica (which I used on my old NeXTCube), but surely something along the lines of (or simpler than) Calculation Center exists?" The Knoppix-based Quantian might be a good place to start; what math software do you recommend?
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Open Source Math Software For Education? 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Octave? (Score:5, Informative)

    by mvdw (613057) on Monday December 13 2004, @07:06PM (#11077301) Homepage
    What about octave (free Matlab clone)?

  • R (GNU S) (Score:5, Informative)

    by Neil Blender (555885) <neilblender@gmail.com> on Monday December 13 2004, @07:06PM (#11077302)
    R statistical language [ucla.edu]

    • Re:R (GNU S) (Score:3, Informative)

      by Kludge (13653)
      R is very good for statistical coding. A good number of professional statiticians code for the project and an even greater number actually use it, and it will run almost any S code written.

      I've used it since graduate school and in my two subsequent professional research jobs. Currently I use it for running statistical simulations in parallel across our 45 node cluster.

    • Re:R (GNU S) (Score:4, Informative)

      by DarkSarin (651985) on Monday December 13 2004, @09:38PM (#11078397) Homepage Journal
      Dangit, you beat me to it!

      I was going to suggest R.

      To the person who claims it is a poor choice for High Schoolers, I disagree, especially if statistics is of interest. It forces you to actually THINK about what you are doing with your models instead of being able to run, willy nilly, any old analysis on any old data (vis-a-vis SPSS).

      It is also good because it is VERY robust in its data import capabilities (excel, spss, etc), and is very strong at doing correct analyses.

      There are some caveats:
      Need to program
      Need to be willing to really learn
      Poor documentation
      Memory intensive for large datasets.

      This last item needs some explanation: R, unlike other statistical packages, loads the entire data set into memory, and performs all analyses there, instead of accessing the disk more frequently. This results in large datasets taking some serious memory, especially once you start working on complex analyses. If you plan to be using 5,000+ observations (which isn't all that uncommon in some fields), you should plan on having a fairly beefy computer.

      The upside is that it can provide much more information than spss could ever hope for. Now, if someone would just finish the plugin for kalc or gnumeric that would allow direct access, that would be awesome.

      (For R afficianados who aren't aware, check out ESS-Emacs Speaks Statistics--it's great for unix coders, but unnecessary for win32 stats folks).

  • Maxima (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 13 2004, @07:07PM (#11077314)
    Look at http://maxima.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net].

    • Re:Maxima (Score:3, Informative)

      by willy134 (682318)
      I have played with Maxima a little bit. I think it is a decent peice of software. It started out as a government research app that was later open sourced. Unfortunately development is slow (if even existent) but on windows it did a fairly good/fast job of calculating funny integrals. They plotting features are decent also.

      It is much closer to mathematica than matlab. I don't know how it compares to mathcad.

      Hey it is free so at least give it a try.

      • Re:Maxima (Score:5, Informative)

        by RealAlaskan (576404) on Monday December 13 2004, @08:05PM (#11077782) Homepage Journal
        I have played with Maxima a little bit. I think it is a decent peice of software. It started out as a government research app that was later open sourced. Unfortunately development is slow (if even existent)...

        It is being actively developed [sourceforge.net]. While William Schelter was maintaining it (for 19 lonely years), development was very slow indeed. I gather that most of the work was done by him, and some of his graduate students. Since his death in 2001, a number of other people have come on board, and there is a lot of catching up to do.

        Some documentation [sourceforge.net]has been rewritten, a great many bugs have been squashed, the package has been ported to several Lisps (yes, it does matter to users), there has been at least one new Emacs mode written for it, it can be used with Texmacs, and so on. Some of the people who are working on it are big names in their spheres, like Richard Fateman [berkeley.edu], who worked on the original Macsyma.

        Version 5.9.1 was released in September '04, and the next big step will be the GREAT SOURCE DOWNCASING. Maxima is so old that most of it is written in all caps. There is a lot to do to bring it into the 21st century, and most of what's being done right now is behind-the-scenes stuff.

        As you say, it's decent software now. It's fully usable, with a useful GUI for Windows (developed on Schelter's watch, as I recall). It is probably better for memory intensive work than Maple or Mathematica; that's what initially got me started using it.

      • Re:Maxima (Score:3, Interesting)

        by antiMStroll (664213)
        "I don't know how it compares to mathcad."

        Is there GPL software comparable to MathCAD? Due to the pioneering work of Martin King (http://www.quarter-wave.com/ [quarter-wave.com]) the latter has become popular among DIY builders for modeling transmission lines speakers. Most though can't justify the ~$1000 for hobby software and use MathCAD's crippled demo, Explorer 8.

      • Re:Maxima history (Score:3, Interesting)

        by xtermin8 (719661)
        Macsyma was actually started at MIT, written in lisp, part of Project MAC. At least two different versions came out, Maxima was from the Department of Energy's version, which has been open sourced. Another version was owned by Symbolics, then was spun off into its own company. I beleive there's still another version and MIT still retains the rights to it. Feel free to correct me on any of this- but for sure the software has a long and tangled history.

    • Re:Maxima (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Skjellifetti (561341) on Monday December 13 2004, @10:10PM (#11078537) Journal
      My dad was a physicist at ORNL who started using the DOE MIT version of Maxima in the early 1970s. He thought Maxima was the greatest thing since sliced bread. His division hired a new Phd at one point whose dissertation had taken 18 months to derive by hand. When he joined ORNL, he ran the problem through Maxima. Only took an afternoon and he was quite relieved when Maxima got the same answer he had gotten by hand.

  • GraphCalc is good (Score:5, Informative)

    by theteenager (810778) on Monday December 13 2004, @07:07PM (#11077316) Homepage
    GraphCalc [graphcalc.com] is a good graphing program. It might not do everything in math, but it graphs pretty nicely.

  • Math Software? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jtbauki (838979) on Monday December 13 2004, @07:08PM (#11077319)

    The whole technology upgrade the schools have been getting doesn't seem to be making learning more efficient. It seems like a big waste of money.

    If a kid doesn't spend time studying his books, why would he start studying his software?

      • You don't even know what Mathematica is, don't you?

        Actually, Mathematica is completely inappropriate for high school math courses. It is very complex, insanely powerful, and just way too much for simple stuff like plotting approximations of integrals or whatever. For high school math, there is nothing more fruitful than just working it out by hand. Plotting even a few points is sufficient to show a concept. Are students and teachers so damn insecure that they feel they need 3-D 24-bit color plots of d

        • Re:Math Software? (Score:4, Interesting)

          by civilizedINTENSITY (45686) on Monday December 13 2004, @07:57PM (#11077715)
          Actually its totally appropriate. Highschools that want to do CalculusI thru DiffEq for their advanced students use Mathematica and Calculus Remote from The Ohio State University [ohio-state.edu] (CROSU), or University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's Netmath program. I believe Harvard does the same.

          I think a problem might be that you associate highschool math with trig. Using Mathematica in a self-based course of instruction they can move as fast as is natural for them. Why not let the kids move past dull rote mechanical skills and learning by doing something useful?

          Is there really any reason why (the undergrad intro) QM can't be taught in HS using visualization and moderate Linear Algebra skills? I mean, if they can get as far as DiffEq? Isn't it more the *style* of instruction (chalk vs. powerpoint), and what we have them do for homework that holds them back more than the concepts?
          • LOL, what kind of math did you take in High School? I was taking A.P. classes in High School.

            So was I. I even got a 5 on the AP test (like it ever mattered). Mathcad was a drag. Mathematica would have been hell. We spent so much time dicking around with the computers, we could probably have covered half a chapter in that time! Computers add so much complexity that they are really only a benefit for very large problems, like CFD over an airplane wing. High school students really don't need a computer

  • gnuplot (Score:3, Insightful)

    by sugarmotor (621907) on Monday December 13 2004, @07:11PM (#11077342) Homepage
    What are these "kids" trying to learn?

    They can explore lots of stuff just with gnuplot.
    bc is also pretty good - simple to learn and use.

    Who needs all the flashy stuff?

    Stephan

  • Why software? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Hatta (162192) on Monday December 13 2004, @07:11PM (#11077344) Journal
    There were no computers in my middle/high school math classes and I learned math just fine. What is your friend trying to do that couldn't be done better with pen and paper and old fashioned teaching? Computers aren't a panacea.

    • Re:Why software? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Zangief (461457)
      Because there are things that simply cannot be done without a computer. Fractals and strange atractors were only unleashed once computers were available.

      Plus, there are other cool things you can do. Long equations can be simnplefied, you don't have to write so much, and you can concentrate in the mathematics, instead of in the often tedious mechanics.

      • Re:Why software? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by upsidedown_duck (788782) on Monday December 13 2004, @07:36PM (#11077552)
        Fractals and strange atractors were only unleashed once computers were available.

        Fractals are merely a novelty at a high school level. What can students struggling with pre-calc do with fractals other than gawk at pretty pictures? To appreciate them beyond "hey, it's glittery...oooh, color cycling....drool" takes a motivation and interest not present in most students.

          • Re:Why software? (Score:5, Insightful)

            by upsidedown_duck (788782) on Monday December 13 2004, @07:54PM (#11077685)
            But, those shiny colors can motivate them.

            In the worst way. "Hey, those fractals look pretty cool, I think I'll sign up for this advanced fractals course." --semester begins-- "Holy flying fluke, Batman, where did these equations come from?!?" --drops class, ends with less motivation than before--

    • Re:Why software? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by spac3manspiff (839454)
      Yeah, and guys in the stone age did math with rocks and did fine too.

      But I think progress education of younger generations if we allow them to use new technology. Introducing math to kids in middle school allows them to become more familiar with the technology. Like, my dad can do math perfectly with pen and pencil but can use a computer or graph on a calculator. That shows the difference in generations.

  • bc (Score:4, Funny)

    by bbh (210459) on Monday December 13 2004, @07:11PM (#11077354)
    bc [gnu.org]

  • For a high school freshman . . . (Score:5, Insightful)

    by kfg (145172) on Monday December 13 2004, @07:11PM (#11077355)
    I wouldn't recommend software at all. I would recommend something we call "pencil and paper." Learning mathematics (and reading music, and a number of other such undertakings) is as much a mechanical skill as an intellectual one and the quickest way to the brain is through the fingers.

    Come back when they're in college and ask again.

    KFG
    • No.

      Software is useful. As a freshman in trig, I was learning calculus on my own, and Mathematica helped. There was one derivative in particular which I couldn't figure out; after using Mathematica to find the answer, the method whereby you reach that answer came to me a few days later -- it was much more obvious from the answer than from the question. There have been countless discussions between my friend and I as to how Mathematica arrived at a certain solution.

      You try doing large integrals with pencil-
      • I was learning calculus on my own
        If you're learning calculus on your own, you're going to expect things to be different. For people who have the luxury of a class where they learn calculus, I think you'll find your argument doesn't hold. Certainly I recall that in second and third year calc, when asked to compute a derivative or an integral we would usually be given the answer. That way the lecturer could ask a more complex problem that tested more techniques and still expect the right percentage of stud

  • Math.com? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by DigitalRaptor (815681) on Monday December 13 2004, @07:15PM (#11077383) Homepage
    I hate to state the obvious, but Math.com [math.com] is where I've spent some time brushing up on all the math I've forgotten.

    I'd love a math tutor style of program that would fluidly walk you through from basic math all the way to calc and trig, automatically adjusting to your rate of learning based on little exercises.

  • You want Maxima (Score:5, Interesting)

    by cabraverde (648652) on Monday December 13 2004, @07:18PM (#11077418)
    Maxima [sourceforge.net]:

    It's the closest thing I know of to an OSS Mathematica. It is to Mathematica what The Gimp is to Photoshop. Namely, it's a fair way behind the front runner but still very usable.

  • OT: Learn the math, then use the tools (Score:5, Insightful)

    by davidwr (791652) on Monday December 13 2004, @07:19PM (#11077421) Homepage Journal
    I know this is a bit off-topic, but it can't be overemphasized:

    If possible, students should learn the principles behind the math before they are allowed to use fancy tools like calculators and computers.

    My high school teacher made us learn logarithms and trigonometry using a pencil, graph paper, and tables, THEN we got to use a calculator. As for calculus, we did all our graphs by hand, sub-$200 graphing calculators weren't available back then.

    I hope you get some good answers in this thread.

  • a good question deserves a good answer. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by tloh (451585) on Monday December 13 2004, @07:23PM (#11077461)
    I'd like to recommend the very exellent GNUWin project [gnuwin.epfl.ch]. They are a great collection (consisting entirely of GNU software) of applications for not only scientific computing, but also just basic general computing on the Windows platform. Check out the list [gnuwin.epfl.ch] of applications on the two CD set as well as the current wishlist. It includes many of the programs already named. Latest ISO is the Nov 30 release package.

    P.S. I think they're looking for new leadership to continue to project. Please help if you can.

  • I've always loved this quote (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MerlynEmrys67 (583469) on Monday December 13 2004, @07:28PM (#11077502)
    I know this is a niche thing and that there is nothing out there that even comes close to
    Insert excellent software that does just what you want , but surely something along the lines of (or simpler than) Insert Open source project here
    So, what is wrong with people doing a good job and creating value, getting a little bit of that value back so they can pay rent ?

    Just wondering

    • Have you checked out the pricing on math products (Score:4, Interesting)

      by melted (227442) on Monday December 13 2004, @08:03PM (#11077769) Homepage
      Have you checked out the pricing on math products lately? I have. It's freakin' stratospheric, and then they nickel and dime you for extensions.

      My main issue with this pricing structure is that a hobbyist like myself simply can't justify the expense. And that's very unfortunate.

    • Re:I've always loved this quote (Score:5, Insightful)

      by dougmc (70836) <dougmc+slashdot@frenzied.us> on Monday December 13 2004, @08:07PM (#11077800) Homepage
      So, what is wrong with people doing a good job and creating value, getting a little bit of that value back so they can pay rent ?
      Nothing. Exactly like there's nothing wrong with telling people that there's something out there that does exactly what they want and is expensive, and that there is something with some/much/most/all of the functionality but it's Free, Open Source or Cheap.

  • Maxima (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Geoffreyerffoeg (729040) on Monday December 13 2004, @07:47PM (#11077633)
    At National Mu Alpha Theta this summer (a math tournament), I had brought my OS X laptop which happened to have Maxima [sourceforge.net] on it. I use Mathematica at home, but I only have the Win32 version. Maxima is difficult to learn (not user-friendly, but it's almost as powerful as Mathematica -- in fact, its predecessor, Macsyma, was one of the first CASes, predating Mathematica. I used Maxima to verify some lengthy integrals after one test when the answer posted differed significantly from my answer.

    Oh, and it's GPL, and it works on Windows, Linux, and Mac OS X (via Fink).

    BTW, you probably know this, but if you can afford Mathematica or a Math'ca-based product, or at least a student license, it's going to be a lot better and more powerful than any OSS math product today. Math'ca is really an excellent product. Unfortunately, the price matches its quality.

  • Mathematica, of course (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Ed Pegg (613755) <ed@mathpuzzle.com> on Monday December 13 2004, @08:10PM (#11077814) Homepage
    Full disclosure: I work for Wolfram Research [wolfram.com]. But oh -- the irony! I am also a columnist for Math Games at maa.org [maa.org], and I wrote an article about the Quantian Distribution [maa.org]. I didn't want a spammer to start using quantian.org just as the distro was getting popular, so I bought it, and provided a redirect to the main Quantian site. So now, I'm getting doubly Slashdotted. Huzzah. A student should definitely be getting Mathematica for Students [wolfram.com] -- but check with the college first. They might be on a Mathematica Campus [wolfram.com], and can get it for free.

  • Pari-gp, Lisp and interfaces (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Wolfbone (668810) on Monday December 13 2004, @08:30PM (#11077903)
    No-one's mentioned the superb pari-gp [u-bordeaux.fr] yet. It'll draw graphs using gnuplot and unlike much other software of it's type it has excellent documentation.

    Lisp is also prominently absent but I agree with what Chaitin [auckland.ac.nz] says about it being the natural computer language for mathematically minded computer users. Actually I'm surprised it isn't more popular with other software developers - it seems to me to make any kind of programming easier and more pleasurable.

    People who've mentioned Maxima also haven't said anything much about graphical (non-plotting) interfaces to it. I like imaxima in emacs and also TeXmacs - which will act as a graphical front end to many other mathematical programs.

  • Maxima is your best bet (Score:4, Interesting)

    by amundson (21602) on Monday December 13 2004, @08:47PM (#11078032)
    I lead the Maxima project, http://maxima.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]. Maxima is a full-featured GPL'd computer algebra system under active development. We don't hear much from people who want to use Maxima for high school mathematics, but we would welcome the input.

  • Quantian article (Score:5, Informative)

    by Ed Pegg (613755) <ed@mathpuzzle.com> on Monday December 13 2004, @08:58PM (#11078124) Homepage
    I own the quantian.org domain. The following is from my article on the Quantian Distribution [maa.org]. Here is a brief run down of links, programs, and other goodies in Quantian.
    • NumAnalII was taught in MatLab, but Octave worked for me. Never had any problems. Loved the emacs modes! Write scripts in one emacs window, run an octave process in another emacs window...send the current line (or function, or selected text...etc) to the process for evaluation. Very sweet.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2010 Geeknet, Inc.