HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sarath@ee.upenn.edu (P. Sarath Kumar)
Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis
Subject: Re: Help: Gradient Optimization routine needed
Date: 28 Sep 92 14:46:03 GMT
Reply-To: sarath@ee.upenn.edu (P. Sarath Kumar)
Followup-To: sci.math.num-analysis
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

> Does anyone know of a gradient optimization routine which would minimize
> f(x) where x and f are both complex valued vectors. f is non-linear.

I forgot to mention - I am trying to minimize the l2 norm of f(x).

Sarath.
From: haase@zaphod.uchicago.edu (Mark Haase)
Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis
Subject: Shallow Water Sonar
Summary: question
Keywords: sonar, PDE, shallow water
Date: 2 Oct 92 23:56:48 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Mathematics, Univ. of Chicago

Dear Users,

I am a graduate student at the University of Chicago and am interested in
exploring shallow water sonar problems.  Besides the book by Urick,
"Principles of Underwater Sound," does anyone have any recommendations of
books or articles that might involve this subject?  In particular, I would be
interested in those that might involve numerical simulation of dissipative
PDE boundary value problems (with one free boundary, of course).   Even if you
have no suggestion regarding this, I would still be interested in any ideas that
might involve shallow water sonar problems.  Thanks for your time. 

Sincerely,

Chris Haase
Department of Mathematics
University of Chicago
From: JRBANGA@poppy.ucdavis.edu (JULIO RODRIGUEZ BANGA)
Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis
Subject: Info on PDECOL and DSS-II
Date: 28 Sep 92 17:34:06 GMT
Organization: University of California, Davis
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.20


 Dear netters:                                                     
 I'd appreciate receiving information about two partial differential equations
solvers, PDECOL and DSS-II. If they are public domain, please send the address
of an anonymous ftp server with these packages.

 -*** Please answer to julio@iim.csic.es
      I'll post a summary if there is enough interest.

                                            
       Thanks in advance. Regards,
                                      Julio.
           
Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis
From: ledwards@leland.Stanford.EDU (Laurence James Edwards)
Subject: Re: Points in Polygons
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Distribution: inet
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 92 02:27:50 GMT

In article <1992Sep27.001515.28523@leland.Stanford.EDU>, ledwards@leland.Stanford.EDU (Laurence James Edwards) writes:
|> In article <cscoging.3.717415284@unpcs1.cs.unp.ac.za>, cscoging@unpcs1.cs.unp.ac.za (Chris Scogings) writes:
|> |> I've been away and missed the first part of this discussion.  I would be 
|> |> most obliged if someone could mention some references in this area.
|> 
|> Some references:
|> 
|> "Computational Geometry" by Preparata & Shamos
|> "Interactive Computer Graphics" by Giloi
|> "An Introduction to Solid Modeling" by Mantyla
|> "Computer Graphics: principles and practice" by Foley, van Dam, Feiner, & Hughes
|> 
|> |> Why
|> |> can't we find a better algorithm than shooting rays all over the place?
|> 
|> [.......]
|> The tricky part about 1) is when your ray
|> passes through a vertex of the polygon. The brute force approach (metioned in
|> all the references) is to pick another ray and try again.
|> [......]
|> There is a way to implement 1)
|> cleanly: don't count any edge parallel to the ray, and of those edges with one
|> endpoint on the ray, only count the ones that lie on a particular (arbitrarily
|> chosen) side of the ray
|> [.......]

Oops, actually Preparata&Shamos mention the clean way ... it's been a while
since I looked at that book.

Preparata&Shamos also show that with preprocessed convex or star shaped
polygons the test is O(log n) ... Eric Wong also mentions this in article 4643.
The preprocessing is basically sorting and is O(n) ... you can sort by angle
or by position ... in one case you do a binary search to a particular wedge, in
the other you binary search to a trapezoidal strip. Sorting by angles is
probably preferable since then the final test (once you have it narrowed
down to a particular wedge) is faster.

Wow! I had forgotten what a godly book Preparata&Shamos is.

Larry Edwards
edwards@sunrise.stanford.edu
Xref: sparky sci.math.num-analysis:2860 sci.math.stat:2002
From: ckuznia@aludra.usc.edu ( Ckuznia)
Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis,sci.math.stat
Subject: Matlab 2D integration
Date: 28 Sep 1992 14:15:24 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Distribution: inet
NNTP-Posting-Host: aludra.usc.edu

Does anyone out there have a good two-dimensional numerical
integration program written for Matlab?  I use Matlab version 3.5e
that has built-in 1-D integration programs called "quad" and "quad8".

Please email a program if you have one.

Thanks

Charlie
From: jracine@weber.ucsd.edu (Jeff Racine)
Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis
Subject: Is there a bug-fix list for Numerical recipes in C?
Date: 1 Oct 1992 19:20:35 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: weber.ucsd.edu

Hi.

Ths subject line says it all. I am using some NR routines, linmin(),
f1dim(), brent(), mnbrak(), and powell() and am getting unexpected
results. 

If there is a bug list I would really appreciate pointers to it.

Thanks for your time and effort.


-- 
Jeff Racine        
jracine@weber.ucsd.edu
racine@nexus.yorku.ca
--Remember when sex used to be safe and parachuting was dangerous?
Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis
From: erick@fraser.sfu.ca (Erick Bryce Wong)
Subject: Re: Polygon in or out?
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 23:56:09 GMT

pa@verano.sba.ca.us (Pierre Asselin) writes:
>In <Jmv-D2=@engin.umich.edu> takriti@engin.umich.edu (samer Takriti) writes:
>
>>Linear programming does that very simply.
>[Linear program deleted]
>
>Only for convex polygons.  Your LP determins whether the point is
>interior to the convex hull of the polygon, not the polygon itself.

Right, and if you do have the convex polygon with vertices in sorted order,
you can use binary search (assuming constant access time, i.e. not a linked
list) to determine point inclusion in O(log N) time...That has to beat solving
for the convex combination of the vertices with a simple application of linear
programming...

-- 
 -- Erick, the perfect square  :-)
From: bardo@ief-paris-sud.fr (Bardo Muller)
Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis
Subject: EMLIB archive site(s) ?
Keywords: electromagnetics, fdtd
Date: 5 Oct 92 15:05:22 GMT
Reply-To: bardo@ief-paris-sud.fr
Organization: Universite de Paris
Cc: joe@gauss.engga.uwo.ca



in <1992Sep30.121326.16320@julian.uwo.ca>  Joe LoVetri writes


>There is an fdtd code in the EMLIB archive site
>
>	microwave.jpl.nasa.gov (IP adress 128.149.76.31)
>
>see README.DIR file
>
>Joe LoVetri
>
>e-mail: joe@gauss.engga.uwo.ca


I have no luck to connect to the above address (timed out..)

Are there any mirrors etc. known ?

Salut,

___________________________________________________________________________
| Bardo MULLER                          | phone  : [33] [1] 69 41 78 50    |
| Institut d'Electronique Fondamentale  | fax    : [33] [1] 60 19 25 93    |
| Bat. 220 Universite Paris Sud         | e-mail : bardo@ief-paris-sud.fr  |
| 91405 ORSAY CEDEX FRANCE              |             THE NET WORKS !      |
|_______________________________________|__________________________________|
From: ywang1@husc8.harvard.edu (Yongkang Wang)
Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis
Subject: Help Wanted: The Problems
Date: 4 Oct 92 21:07:57 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

\documentstyle[12pt]{article} 
\topmargin -0.2in 
\textheight 8.0in 
\textwidth 5.8in 
\oddsidemargin 0.20in 
\def\baselinestretch{1.55} 
\begin{document} 
\underline{\bf Probelm 1 \rm} \\
\\The agent maximizes the expected discounted utility 
$$E_{0}\sum_{t=0}^{\tilde{T}}    \beta^{t}U(c_{t}),$$
( where $ \tilde{T}\sim[T,
\sigma_{T}^{2}]$,is normaly distributed.)
\\
\\subject to budget constraints:
$$	c_{t} + p^{s}_{t} s_{t}  + 
    p^{b}_{t} b_{t}
   =  s_{t-1} ( p^{s}_{t}  +  d_{t}  ) +  
    b_{t-1} + l_{t}  ;  $$  
where $ s_{t} ,   p^{s}_{t} ,  b_{t} ,    p^{b}_{t},  $ represent, 
respectively, holding and price of one share of stock, and 
holding and price of a riskless real government
 bond, $ d_{t} $ is dividend of the stock, and $ l_{t}$  is the wage
 received by the agent at period t. $d_{t}$ and $l_{t}$ are stochastic processes to
be specified, possibly, as Markov processes. $ E_{0}$  denotes the conditional expectation 
operator given all information available to the agent in time 0.\\

\underline{\bf Problem 2\rm}
\\
\\The agent maximizes the expected discounted utility 
$$E_{0}\sum_{t=0}^{\infty}    \beta^{t}U(c_{t})     $$
subject to budget constraints:
$$	c_{t} + p^{s}_{t} s_{t}  +  
    p^{b}_{t} b_{t}
   =  s_{t-1} ( p^{s}_{t}  +  d_{t}  ) +  
    b_{t-1} + l_{t} - \xi p^{s}_{t} \mid s_{t}-s_{t-1}\mid  ; $$ 
where $\xi$ is a constant, and  all other notations have the same meanings 
as in the previous model. The term $ \xi  p^{s}_{t} \mid s_{t}-s_{t-1}\mid $ represents
transaction cost incurred in trading stock.
\end{document}
From: jracine@weber.ucsd.edu (Jeff Racine)
Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis
Subject: P-dimen min of function, NR in C, powell() - anyone got it to run properly?
Date: 1 Oct 1992 19:11:02 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: weber.ucsd.edu

Hi.

I am trying to minimize a multidimensional function of 5 arguments
without using derivatives. Numerical recipes in C has a routine called
powell(). I have it up and running, but one problem remains.

The routine works fine for 1 dimension, but for two or more
dimensions, it yields the same parameter values for each dimension. I
know this is not the case because simple grid search yields a much
lower value of the objective function with parameters being much
different.

Question: has anyone got the algorithm to work properly? I am using
the 1988 version of NR and associated code. If you have, would you let
me know - I would like to discuss this with you. To get the code
running on an ANSI compiler I had to make a few minor changes, and it
is possible that here is where the bugs crept in.

-- 
Jeff Racine        
jracine@weber.ucsd.edu
racine@nexus.yorku.ca
--Remember when sex used to be safe and parachuting was dangerous?
Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis
From: rcpshdb@dutrun2.tudelft.nl (Han de Bruijn)
Subject: Re: Points in Polygons
Originator: rcpshdb@dutrun2.tudelft.nl
Reply-To: rcpshdb@dutrun2.tudelft.nl (Han de Bruijn)
Organization: Delft University of Technology
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 08:38:43 GMT

In article <1992Sep27.022750.8620@leland.Stanford.EDU> Laurence James Edwards:
> Wow! I had forgotten what a godly book Preparata&Shamos is.

Bad taste.
-- 
* Han de Bruijn; Applications&Graphics | "A little bit of Physics * No
* TUD Computing Centre; P.O. Box 354   | would be NO idleness in  * Oil
* 2600 AJ  Delft; The Netherlands.     | Mathematics" (HdB).      * for
* E-mail: Han.deBruijn@RC.TUDelft.NL --| Fax: +31 15 78 37 87 ----* Blood
Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis
From: patel@sparky.drad.umn.edu ()
Subject: What are Lanczos Parameters?
Organization: University of Minnesota, Radiology Department
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 04:15:27 GMT

The subject line says it all. If you have any pointers please
send me an e-mail to  patel@sparky.drad.umn.edu

Thanks
Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis
From: takriti@engin.umich.edu (samer Takriti)
Subject: Polygon, a point in or out
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 09:30:09 EDT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor

I have received many answers referring to "Computational Geometry,
an introduction" by Preparata and Shamos. Thanks.
It looks to me that he methods proposed by this book can be applied
in R^2 only. Applying these methods in higher dimensions would 
increase the complexity of the algorithm (exponential complexity).
For instance, given n+1 points in R^m (n > m) and assume that the
origin is one of these points, the number of m-1 dimensional facets
of the convex hull is nCm which creates a combinatorial problem.
Is there a method that can check for the inclusion of a point in
a polytope in R^n that does not need an exponential time ? (I mean
methods that depend on ray shooting).
Thanks.
-Samer
From: quantum@milton.u.washington.edu (Tsung-lung Li)
Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis
Subject: IBMBLAS3
Date: 28 Sep 92 10:36:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Sep28.103617.15851
Reply-To: quantum@u.washington.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle


Dear Netters,

I am trying to run a program that needs to call several subroutines in BLAS
on IBM3090 AIX/370.  Is it a must to use the files in ibmblas3 given in the
netlib?

Please e-mail me at quantum@u.washington.edu


Tsung
Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis
From: joep@neon.dfrf.nasa.gov (Joe Pahle)
Subject: in or out of polygon ? 
Reply-To: joep@neon.dfrf.nasa.gov
Organization: NASA Ames-Dryden FRF, Edwards, CA
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 16:22:34 GMT

Please forgive me for asking what may be a stupid question:

Is there a general algorythm for determining if a point [x,y] is interior
or exterior to a convex polygon with verticies [x_i,y_i],i=1:n ? 

In addition, I need to know the min distance to the polygon border
holding either x or y fixed, that is, the min distance along a know
line. I think I can approach the problem by subdividing into quadrants
and using an exaustive search, but I didn't want to re-invent the
wheel if a TOMS/ACM/NETLIB alogrythm already exists. I just didn't know
what keyword to search for !


Thanks in advance,

Joseph W. Pahle 
F-18 HARV flight controls 
phone: 805 258-3185
e-mail: joep@neon.dfrf.nasa.gov 
UUCP: ames!neon.dfrf.nasa.gov!joep

Comment: disclaimers attract lawyers ... here boy !  
NASA Ames Dryden Flight Research Facility, Edwards,CA

Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis
From: rcpshdb@dutrun2.tudelft.nl (Han de Bruijn)
Subject: Re: Points in Polygons
Originator: rcpshdb@dutrun2.tudelft.nl
Reply-To: rcpshdb@dutrun2.tudelft.nl (Han de Bruijn)
Organization: Delft University of Technology
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 08:20:48 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.221602.12539@leland.Stanford.EDU> Laurence James Edwards:
> Well the term, Computational Geometry, was first applied to this
> particular field of study in a 1975 paper by Shamos. The book is

... written by Shamos. Coincidence, huh?

> For example, convex hull algorithms are generalized to n-dimensions, ...

Yes. And I've seen much better treatments of this, Dijkstra for example.

> little is known about point location problems in E^3 and higher dimensions.

Huh? _MANY_ working implementations exist in F.E.M. postprocessing packages,
as well as in "AVS", where I'm currently involved with. Somebody owes me an
explanation.

> Big oh worst case analysis does not always lead to algorithms well suited
> for a particular application, the authors specifically admit that.

Oh, I thought _Applied_ rules the roost in "sci.math.num-analysis" ...
-- 
* Han de Bruijn; Applications&Graphics | "A little bit of Physics * No
* TUD Computing Centre; P.O. Box 354   | would be NO idleness in  * Oil
* 2600 AJ  Delft; The Netherlands.     | Mathematics" (HdB).      * for
* E-mail: Han.deBruijn@RC.TUDelft.NL --| Fax: +31 15 78 37 87 ----* Blood
Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis
From: ledwards@leland.Stanford.EDU (Laurence James Edwards)
Subject: Re: Points in Polygons
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 22:16:02 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.101144.11382@dutrun2.tudelft.nl>, rcpshdb@dutrun2.tudelft.nl (Han de Bruijn) writes:
|> In article <1992Sep27.022750.8620@leland.Stanford.EDU> Laurence James Edwards:
|> > Wow! I had forgotten what a godly book Preparata&Shamos is.
|> 
|> In article <1992Sep28.083843.23616@dutrun2.tudelft.nl> Han de Bruijn:
|> > Bad taste.
|> 
|> In article <1992Sep28.231335.10973@leland.Stanford.EDU> Laurence James Edwards:
|> > While I wouldn't recommend it for recreational reading, Preparata&Shamos does
|> > present a comprehensive and coherent account of computational geometry,
|> > and I think it is the first book devoted to the subject.
|> 
|> Trivialiter, because Preparata&Shamos are the _inventors_ of "Computational
|> Geometry". Same story with "The Fractal Geometry of Nature", by Mandelbrot,
|> which is, equally trivialiter, the "first" book about fractals.

Well the term, Computational Geometry, was first applied to this
particular field of study in a 1975 paper by Shamos. The book is
copyright 1985, so it is not trivially evident that it would be the first
book on the subject.

|> Actually, the stuff covered by Preparata & Shamos IMNSHO barely justifies the
|> creation of a new, separate, area of investigation. A most important part of
|> it (Voronoi tesselation) is nothing new & belongs to classical mathematics.

I didn't realize they did big oh analyses of algorthms in classical
mathematics.

|> The book doesn't contain obvious generalizations to multiple dimensions
|> in the first place. Even worse. Solutions in 2-D are presented in such a
|> way that a generalization from that point to, say, three dimensions is
|> made impossible beforehand.

That simply is not true. For example, convex hull algorithms are generalized
to n-dimensions, and there are a number of sections on extending 2-D results
to higher dimensions.

|> One shouldn't use specific properties of the
|> plane (like orientation of angles) in a theory that could be generalized
|> to three and more dimensions.

I assume you mean the point in polytope problem here. The theory is
not about general algorithms that work in all dimensions but about worst
case analysis for a given problem. The authors point out that very
little is known about point location problems in E^3 and higher dimensions.

|> Overall, the attacks presented in the book
|> are quite unprofessional. Any experienced programmer could do better.

Ahem, "unprofessional"? First off, the book is *an introduction*. Second,
they do not claim to present professionally written code, the point
of the book is the theoretical worst case analysis of possible algorithms
answering a number of related geometric queries. Big oh worst case analysis
does not always lead to algorithms well suited for a particular application,
the authors specifically admit that.

Larry Edwards
From: om8941@curry (Orlin Melstrand)
Subject: Re: Programming in F77 .... pointers please ?
Organization: Medtronic, Inc.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 13:11:36 GMT

natarsu@mse.ogi.edu (N. Sukumar) writes:
: 
: 	Hi ! I'm looking for suitable refs./books that outline
: good programming (Fortran 77) practices that one "should"
: follow to develop sound and comprehensible numerical s/w in F77.
: 
: Thanks for all pointers/help in advance.
: 
: -suku.
: email: natarsu@mse.ogi.edu
: --
: N. Sukumar                   Home Phone: (503)-690-3097
: Department of MS&E           Work  "   : (503)-690-1121 (X7451)
: Oregon Graduate Institute      ****** BLAZERS IN 1993 ******

You might look at Fortran 77: Principles of Programming, by Jerrold L. Wagener, Wiley, 1980.
It might be getting a little old now, but I still find it helpful on occasion.

~A
From: retzer@convex.csd.uwm.edu (Joe J Retzer)
Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis
Subject: Gauss for windows
Date: 4 Oct 1992 22:30:21 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Distribution: inet
Reply-To: retzer@convex.csd.uwm.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.30
Originator: retzer@convex.csd.uwm.edu

Does anyone know if Aptech is planning to come out with a version of 
Gauss for windows? I'd really hate to learn another package if I could
avoid it, but I'll make a switch if necessary.
	
			   Many thanks in advance,
				   Joe
Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis
From: rcpshdb@dutrun2.tudelft.nl (Han de Bruijn)
Subject: Re: Points in Polygons
Originator: rcpshdb@dutrun2.tudelft.nl
Reply-To: rcpshdb@dutrun2.tudelft.nl (Han de Bruijn)
Organization: Delft University of Technology
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 10:11:44 GMT

In article <1992Sep27.022750.8620@leland.Stanford.EDU> Laurence James Edwards:
> Wow! I had forgotten what a godly book Preparata&Shamos is.

In article <1992Sep28.083843.23616@dutrun2.tudelft.nl> Han de Bruijn:
> Bad taste.

In article <1992Sep28.231335.10973@leland.Stanford.EDU> Laurence James Edwards:
> While I wouldn't recommend it for recreational reading, Preparata&Shamos does
> present a comprehensive and coherent account of computational geometry,
> and I think it is the first book devoted to the subject.

Trivialiter, because Preparata&Shamos are the _inventors_ of "Computational
Geometry". Same story with "The Fractal Geometry of Nature", by Mandelbrot,
which is, equally trivialiter, the "first" book about fractals.

Actually, the stuff covered by Preparata & Shamos IMNSHO barely justifies the
creation of a new, separate, area of investigation. A most important part of
it (Voronoi tesselation) is nothing new & belongs to classical mathematics.

In article <5C1-w=_@engin.umich.edu> Samer Takriti:
> I have received many answers referring to "Computational Geometry,
> an introduction" by Preparata and Shamos. Thanks.
> It looks to me that he methods proposed by this book can be applied
> in R^2 only. Applying these methods in higher dimensions would 
> increase the complexity of the algorithm (exponential complexity).

The book doesn't contain obvious generalizations to multiple dimensions
in the first place. Even worse. Solutions in 2-D are presented in such a
way that a generalization from that point to, say, three dimensions is
made impossible beforehand. One shouldn't use specific properties of the
plane (like orientation of angles) in a theory that could be generalized
to three and more dimensions. Overall, the attacks presented in the book
are quite unprofessional. Any experienced programmer could do better.

Godly book? You know what godly books are? Here is a list of my ultimate
favorites:

- "The Feynman Lectures on Physics, part III"
- "The Theory of Radiation" by Max Planck
- "The Special Theory of Relativity" by Albert Einstein
- "Relativity Reexamined" by Leon Brillouin
- "Le phenomene humaine" by Teilhard de Chardin
- "Das Kapital, part 1" by Karl Marx
- "Buitenaardse Beschaving" by Stefan Denaerde
-  And, oh well, The Bible itself ...

Preparata&Shamos, or Mandelbrot, will never be in that list.
-- 
* Han de Bruijn; Applications&Graphics | "A little bit of Physics * No
* TUD Computing Centre; P.O. Box 354   | would be NO idleness in  * Oil
* 2600 AJ  Delft; The Netherlands.     | Mathematics" (HdB).      * for
* E-mail: Han.deBruijn@RC.TUDelft.NL --| Fax: +31 15 78 37 87 ----* Blood
Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis
From: bminor@afit.af.mil (Bryan M. Minor)
Subject: Confluent Hpergeometric Function Calculation
Organization: Air Force Institute of Technology
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 16:18:26 GMT

I need to calculate Confluent Hypergeometric functions of 
the form:
           M( (m+1), (m+n+2), -x)
           M( (n+1), (m+n+2), x)
   where
           (0 < Abs[x])
           n = 0, 1, 2, 3, ...
           m = 0, 1, 2, 3, ...

I picked up a package last night off of Netlib that claims
to be able to calculate these for most cases using a log-
orithmic method ("dchu.f").  Has anyone used this code from 
Netlib? I am looking for a double precision, fast code 
that preforms these calculations which I can use in a 
Fortran 77 code.  Should I really be looking at IMSL? What
about MATLAB?  Portablility is major concern, that is why 
I would prefer to stick with a straight Fortran 77 code. 
Any help here would be greatly appreciated!  
Thanks! -> Bryan Minor
From: stvjc@gauss.med.harvard.edu (Vincent Carey 2-3265)
Newsgroups: sci.math.num-analysis
Subject: adaptive function plotting?
Date: 5 Oct 92 03:33:19 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Harvard Medical School

would appreciate references or pointers on software for
function plotting in which grid points are chosen more
finely as the function becomes rougher.
Xref: sparky sci.math.num-analysis:2873 sci.math.stat:2023 sci.physics:15690