This file is the GSL bug tracking system. The CVS version of this file should be kept up-to-date. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- BUG#1 -- gsl_sf_hyperg_2F1_e fails for some arguments From: keith.briggs@bt.com Subject: gsl_sf_hyperg_2F1 bug report Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 12:30:04 -0000 gsl_sf_hyperg_2F1_e fails with arguments (1,13,14,0.999227196008978,&r). It should return 53.4645... . #include #include int main (void) { gsl_sf_result r; gsl_sf_hyperg_2F1_e (1,13,14,0.999227196008978,&r); printf("r = %g %g\n", r.val, r.err); } NOTES: The program overflows the maximum number of iterations in gsl_sf_hyperg_2F1, due to the presence of a nearby singularity at (c=a+b,x=1) so the sum is slowly convergent. The exact result is 53.46451441879150950530608621 as calculated by gp-pari using sumpos(k=0,gamma(a+k)*gamma(b+k)*gamma(c)*gamma(1)/ (gamma(c+k)*gamma(1+k)*gamma(a)*gamma(b))*x^k) The code needs to be extended to handle the case c=a+b. This is the main problem. The case c=a+b is special and needs to be computed differently. There is a special formula given for it in Abramowitz & Stegun 15.3.10 As reported by Lee Warren another set of arguments which fail are: #include #include int main (void) { gsl_sf_result r; gsl_sf_hyperg_2F1_e (-1, -1, -0.5, 1.5, &r); printf("r = %g %g\n", r.val, r.err); } The correct value is -2. See also, From: Olaf Wucknitz To: bug-gsl@gnu.org Subject: [Bug-gsl] gsl_sf_hyperg_2F1 Hi, I am having a problem with gsl_sf_hyperg_2F1. With the parameters (-0.5, 0.5, 1, x) the returned values show a jump at x=0.5. For x<0.5 the results seem to be correct, while for x>0.5 they aren't. The function gsl_sf_hyperg_2F1_e calls hyperg_2F1_series for x<0.5, but hyperg_2F1_reflect for x>0.5. The latter function checks for c-a-b being an integer (which it is in my case). If I change one of the parameters a,b,c by a small amount, the other branch of the function is taken and the results are correct again. Unfortunately I know too little about the numerics of 2F1 to suggest a patch at the moment. Regards, Olaf Wucknitz -- Joint Institute for VLBI in Europe wucknitz@jive.nl ---------------------------------------------------------------------- BUG#44 -- gamma_inc_P and gamma_inc_Q only satisfy P+Q=1 within errors The sum of gamma_inc_P and gamma_inc_Q doesn't always satisfy the identity P+Q=1 exactly (although it is correct within errors), due the slightly different branch conditions for the series and continued fraction expansions. These could be made identical so that P+Q=1 exactly. #include #include int main (void) { gsl_sf_result r1, r2; double a = 0.3, x = 1.0; gsl_sf_gamma_inc_P_e (a, x, &r1); gsl_sf_gamma_inc_Q_e (a, x, &r2); printf("%.18e\n", r1.val); printf("%.18e\n", r2.val); printf("%.18e\n", r1.val + r2.val); } $ ./a.out 9.156741562411074842e-01 8.432584375889111417e-02 9.999999999999985567e-01 --------------------------------------------------------------------- BUG#50 - gsl_linalg_solve_symm_tridiag requires positive definite matrix A zero on the diagonal will cause NaNs even though a reasonable solution could be computed in principle. #include int main (void) { double d[] = { 0.00, 1.21, 0.80, 1.55, 0.76 } ; double e[] = { 0.82, 0.39, 0.09, 0.68 } ; double b[] = { 0.07, 0.62, 0.81, 0.11, 0.65} ; double x[] = { 0.00, 0.00, 0.00, 0.00, 0.00} ; gsl_vector_view dv = gsl_vector_view_array(d, 5); gsl_vector_view ev = gsl_vector_view_array(e, 4); gsl_vector_view bv = gsl_vector_view_array(b, 5); gsl_vector_view xv = gsl_vector_view_array(x, 5); gsl_linalg_solve_symm_tridiag(&dv.vector, &ev.vector, &bv.vector, &xv.vector); gsl_vector_fprintf(stdout, &xv.vector, "% .5f"); d[0] += 1e-5; gsl_linalg_solve_symm_tridiag(&dv.vector, &ev.vector, &bv.vector, &xv.vector); gsl_vector_fprintf(stdout, &xv.vector, "% .5f"); } $ ./a.out nan nan nan nan nan 0.13626 0.08536 1.03840 -0.60009 1.39219 AUG 2007: We now return an error code for this case. To return a solution we would need to do a permutation, see slatec/dgtsl.f ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Last assigned bug number = 62