https://community.wolfram.com RSS Feed for Wolfram Community showing any discussions tagged with Wolfram|Alpha sorted by active. https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/3758832 Introduction In this post I use Wolfram technologies and Wolfram Language syntax to investigate an exact algebraic chain connecting the constants 4096, 1729, and an eighteenth-root operator arising in my mathematical investigations. The purpose of this post is to illustrate symbolic computation and high-precision numerical verification using Wolfram technologies. All symbolic computations presented below are expressed in Wolfram Language syntax and verified using Wolfram computational technologies. Step 1. Exact symbolic identity expr = (Sqrt[2 - Sqrt[3]] - Sqrt[2 + Sqrt[3]])^24; FullSimplify[expr] Output: 4096 Step 2. Hardy–Ramanujan number ramanujan = 27*Sqrt[expr] + 1; FullSimplify[ramanujan] Output: 1729 Step 3. Eighteenth-root operator operator = (expr + ramanujan)^(1/18); N[operator,50] Output: 1.618762396... Step 4. Comparison with the Golden Ratio N[GoldenRatio,50] N[operator - GoldenRatio,50] The second command computes the numerical difference between the algebraic operator and the Golden Ratio. Step 5. High-precision computation N[operator,100] This confirms the stability of the numerical value at arbitrary precision. Visualization Plot[ (4096 + 1729)^(1/x), {x,10,25}, PlotRange->All, AxesLabel->{"Exponent","Value"} ] The graph illustrates how the algebraic operator evolves as the exponent varies. Conclusion This post illustrates how Wolfram Language can be used for exact symbolic computation, arbitrary precision arithmetic, numerical verification, visualization of algebraic operators. The complete symbolic chain 4096 ↓ 1729 ↓ (4096 + 1729)^(1/18) ↓ 1.618762396... is obtained through Wolfram technologies using Wolfram Language syntax. ![enter image description here][1] ![enter image description here][2] The accompanying Wolfram|Alpha evaluations confirm the exact symbolic identities and the corresponding high-precision numerical values, illustrating the effectiveness of Wolfram technologies for symbolic mathematical exploration. [1]: https://community.wolfram.com//c/portal/getImageAttachment?filename=Screenshot2026-07-14154755.png&userId=2483773 [2]: https://community.wolfram.com//c/portal/getImageAttachment?filename=Screenshot2026-07-14155008.png&userId=2483773 Michele Nardelli 2026-07-14T14:08:26Z https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/3743762 I would like to ask that is every where available full list of definitions of non standard constants (which do not occurs in Wolfram language) which appear in Wolfram Alpha formulas e.g.: G_g G_Ge G_Go etc. Artur Jasinski 2026-07-03T10:36:20Z https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/3742374 I’m curious about the calculation methods used in weight loss calculators within WA, specifically, how the weight loss progress graph is generated. When I input unrealistic data, I observe overfitting artefacts and some jaggedness (maybe a behaviour of InterpolatingFunction). Could *NDSolve* / *WhenEvent* with be involved here? ![enter image description here][1] I’d like to know what lies behind these calculations, but understand that BMR models are used in the formulas: FormulaData[{"BasalMetabolicRate", "Female", "Harris-Benedict"}] FormulaData[{"BasalMetabolicRate", "Female", "Mifflin"}] FormulaData[{"BasalMetabolicRate", "Male", "Harris-Benedict"}] FormulaData[{"BasalMetabolicRate", "Male", "Mifflin"}] and Energy Expenditure involved (for example): FormulaData[{"PhysicalActivityEnergyExpenditure", "Male"}] but how exactly are the graph and the regimen duration calculated? I want to get code for local calculations [1]: https://community.wolfram.com//c/portal/getImageAttachment?filename=Internalsofweightlosscalculator.png&userId=3574214 Thea Gulina 2026-07-01T14:57:18Z https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/3741202 Hi WolframAlpha team, Sorry, I am not sure where the correct place to report this bug is. I hope this is the right place. I would like to report several parsing issues in WolframAlpha involving simple arithmetic expressions and implicit multiplication. These are surprising because they affect very basic mathematical inputs. Incorrect precedence/parsing for : and * -------------------------------------- Input: 5:3*3 Expected: 5 Result: 5:9 Notes: I expected this to be interpreted as (5 / 3) * 3, following standard left-to-right evaluation for division and multiplication. However, it appears to be interpreted as 5 / (3 * 3), which gives 5/9. Incorrect parsing of adjacent number and fraction with no space before the fraction ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Input: 2_fraction(2, 3) There is no space between 2 and fraction(2, 3). The underscore here is only used to show adjacency. Possible expected behavior: - Interpret it as a mixed number: 2 + 2/3 = 8/3 - Interpret it as multiplication: 2 * (2/3) = 4/3 - Or report an ambiguous/invalid input Result: 22/3 Notes: The issue is not that WolframAlpha chooses mixed number vs multiplication. The issue is that it appears to parse the expression incorrectly by concatenating the leading 2 into the numerator, producing 22/3. Incorrect parsing of adjacent fraction and number with no space after the fraction --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Input: fraction(2, 3)_2 There is no space between fraction(2, 3) and 2. The underscore here is only used to show adjacency. Possible expected behavior: - Interpret it as multiplication: (2/3) * 2 = 4/3 - Or report an ambiguous/invalid input Result: 2/32 Notes: The trailing 2 seems to be concatenated into the denominator instead of being treated as multiplication or rejected as ambiguous/invalid input. Incorrect behavior when choosing "Use as product" ------------------------------------------------- Input: 2 2/3 There is a space between 2 and 2/3. WolframAlpha shows: Assuming 2 2/3 is a mixed fraction | Use 2 2/3 as a product instead Expected when choosing "Use as product": 2 * (2/3) = 4/3 Result after clicking the product interpretation: {2, 2/3} Notes: The clarification option is useful, but when I choose to use the expression as a product, it appears to become a list instead of a multiplication expression. Expected behavior ----------------- For expressions involving adjacent numbers and fractions, WolframAlpha should distinguish between valid interpretations, such as: 2 2/3 as a mixed number: 2 + 2/3 = 8/3 and: 2 * 2/3 as a product: 4/3 If the input is ambiguous or invalid, reporting ambiguity or an input error would be better than silently concatenating digits into the numerator or denominator. If the user explicitly chooses "Use as product", the expression should not be converted into a list. Why this matters ---------------- These are very simple arithmetic cases, so incorrect parsing here can easily mislead users. The issue is especially concerning because WolframAlpha is widely trusted for mathematical computation. Could you please check the parser behavior for these cases? Thank you. Giang Do 2026-06-29T10:26:07Z https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/3666749 Hello! I'd like to try short answers API with MMBasic for myself. As for any APIs I tried I did the following: Opened a TCP client as "api.wolframalpha.com", port 80. Send TCP request as "GET /v1/result?appid=MYAPPIDHERE&i=speed+of+light"+CRLF Opening TCP clinet is ok, but for response I got 404 Not found (in html structure). Something I need to do in an other way? This was worked for 99% of simple APIs. Thanks a lot! Gábor Terék 2026-03-20T11:48:52Z https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/3662573 Please note that as of very recently, this no longer works: WolframAlpha["integral (E^(cos x))((cos x)^2)(sin x) dx", {{"IndefiniteIntegral", 2}, "Content"}, PodStates -> {"IndefiniteIntegral__Step-by-step solution"}] as it pruduces: `Missing["NotAvailable"]`. After hours of searching, I stumbled on a solution/workaround. First note that the middle line: {{"podid",subpodid},"property"} is ostensibly not necessary (I will return it later), so one can invoke: WolframAlpha["integral (E^(cos x))((cos x)^2)(sin x) dx", PodStates -> {"IndefiniteIntegral__Step-by-step solution"}] This provides the step-by-step solution, however all of the pods are now there. In addition, one would need to click on "Show all steps" for all of them to appear. Sometimes the button is "Show step-by-step solution," and then another button for showing all steps. Apparently, due to these extra buttons, WRI added (did I miss the memo?) an undocumented `PodState` of `"IndefiniteIntegral__Show all steps"` (or for other podids: `"Result__Show all steps"`, etc.). This solves the "button" problem, however all of the pods are still present. So we return the `{{"podid",subpodid},"property"}` line, however we do not want only the `subpodid` of 2, but rather all of them. Putting this all together, and wrapping it in a `Column[]` in order to space things out a bit vertically, we have: Column[ WolframAlpha[ "integral (E^(cos x))((cos x)^2)(sin x) dx", {{"IndefiniteIntegral", All}, "Content"}, PodStates -> { "IndefiniteIntegral__Step-by-step solution", "IndefiniteIntegral__Show all steps" } ][[All, 2]], Left, 2 ] Aaron Naiman 2026-03-15T12:07:57Z https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/3659892 &[Wolfram Notebook][1] [1]: https://www.wolframcloud.com/obj/fab0aaa2-5d63-4566-8eca-4240f66f7920 Daniel Carvalho 2026-03-14T01:14:56Z https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/3632161 I was trying to use the problem generator to generate some calculus problems however whenever I entire the site I just get a white screen and there is no GUI whatsoever I’ve tried checking online about this however I haven’t found anything I’ve also tried a number of troubleshooting options with no success does anyone know what’s going on? kayson vidal 2026-02-01T20:35:19Z https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/3604903 For reducing such input from a range (-infinity; +infinity) to the target interval (-π; +π] on which trigonometric functions shall operate, the original input must be taken modulo 2π. Performance of such a modulo reduction on limited hardware systems depends on the number of digits you provide for 2π. Said number may be in the order of some hundred to some thousand. How can I specify this number for WolframAlpha? WolframAlpha understands my request to give me, e.g., 700 digits of 2π and returns them properly. But if and when I try to compute a given real number modulo (700 digits of 2π) it fails to decode my wish and, alas, doesn't advise me what to do instead. Any hint in this matter is appreciated. Thanks in advance. Walter Bonin 2026-01-11T23:23:02Z https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/3604186 Hello Community,I’ve been exploring different ways to teach the "Chain Rule" to students who find the standard Leibniz notation $dy/dx = dy/du \cdot du/dx$ a bit abstract when applied to nested functions like $f(g(h(x)))$.While `D[f[g[x]], x]` in Wolfram Language gives the perfect result instantly, I’ve found that students often benefit from seeing a "Step Tree" or a "Decomposition Table" to understand which rule is being applied at which depth. I’ve been building a project to automate this specific pedagogical breakdown: [Derivative Calculus Solver][1]. It focuses on showing the intermediate "substitution" steps that occur before reaching the final simplified form.My Question: > When handling highly nested functions, do you find it more effective to teach the "Inside-Out" method (starting with the innermost function) or the "Outside-In" (the standard Power/Chain rule approach)?For example, in the following WL code, the result is clear, but the "logic path" can be interpreted in two ways:Code snippet(* A nested example for discussion *) f[x_] := Cos[Log[x^2 + 1]]^3 D[f[x], x] // TraditionalForm I’ve tried to align the logic on my site with the `WolframAlpha["derivative of...", "Steps"]` output, but I’m curious if the community has thoughts on how to better visualize "partial results" for students who get lost in the algebra. Looking forward to your insights! [1]: https://www.derivativecalculus.com/ Mian Muhammad ASGHAR 2026-01-10T17:46:41Z https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/3599693 The current Wolfram Alpha Pro MathML File Upload example is OK, but ... https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=display+form&fileId=c3f74f5f-fa51-492e-85a8-799a434ab84f I found a better one! Stewart Dickson 2026-01-01T22:35:54Z https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/3246264 When submitting a Data Drop Databin for processing with WolframAlpha, I am only getting an ad for Data Drop rather than an analysis of the data (see screenshot). Broken? ![Screenshot of WolframAlpha showing an ad link for Data Drop instead of an analysis of the data in the Databin][1] [1]: https://community.wolfram.com//c/portal/getImageAttachment?filename=Screenshot2024-08-11at8.43.54%E2%80%AFPM.png&userId=3066008 Steven Buehler 2024-08-12T00:46:13Z https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/3590142 &[Wolfram Notebook][1] [1]: https://www.wolframcloud.com/obj/38d38de1-d936-4ebd-a3f7-5a54ce879d4f Gay Wilson 2025-12-12T19:59:51Z https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/3542971 ![enter image description here][1] Save the date: Saturday, November 8, 2025 Communication - Wolfram User Conference 2025 - Brazil (WUCB-2025) To answer questions, share and learn more about Wolfram tech at the "Conferência de usuários Wolfram 2025 - Brasil" and hackathon send your message here... Conference date: November 8, 2025 (Saturday) from 9:00 pm to 5:00 pm (GMT-3 - São Paulo, SP, Brazil) at Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie Online Brazilian HACKATON starting: Saturday, November 8 to Monday, November, 17, 2025, online To submit a talk (30 min) send title and abstract (250-300 words) to: brazil_2025@wolfram.com Website and more details coming soon... ---------- FOR PORTUGUESE READERS: Comunicação - Conferência de usuários Wolfram 2025 - Brasil (WUCB-2025) Para tirar dúvidas, compartilhar e saber mais sobre a tecnologia Wolfram e a " Conferência de usuários Wolfram 2025 - Brasil" e hackathon mande sua mensagem aqui... Data da conferência: Dia 8 de novembro de 2025 (Sábado) das 09:00 as 17:00 em São Paulo, SP, Brasil, na Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie Hackathon on-line: Dia 8 de novembro até a 17 de novembro de 2025 Para submeter uma palestra (30 min) envie o título e abstract (250-300 palavras) para: brazil_2025@wolfram.com Website e mais detalhes em breve... Dicas para inspiração: - Para se inspirar use o [Wolfram Language Hackathon][2] tech - Ou veja os aplicativos disponíveis no [Product Hunt][3] projetos podem ser prototipados e extendidos com a tecnologia Wolfram de forma muito produtiva - Expore um problema usando [ciências dos dados][4]. - Use ferramentas avançadas de [Inteligência Artificial][5] (IA) - Explore visualizações interativas e código no [Wolfram Demonstration Project][6] - E também exemplos de projetos em Wolfram Community [Staff Picks][7]. Acompanhe a Wolfram Brasil nas mídias sociais: - https://www.facebook.com/WolframResearchBrazil - https://www.instagram.com/wolframbrazil/ **Novo** endereço do evento para 2025: - Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie - Auditório Reverendo Wilson de Souza Lopes - Rua Piauí 143, andar 11 - Higienópolis - Dia 8 de novembro de 2025 (sábado) - Das 9:00 às 17:00 horas [1]: https://community.wolfram.com//c/portal/getImageAttachment?filename=BR-CONF-2025-SAVE-DATE.png&userId=68072 [2]: https://www.wolfram.com/hackathons/ [3]: https://www.producthunt.com/ [4]: https://www.wolfram.com/wolfram-u/multiparadigm-data-science/ [5]: https://www.wolfram.com/resources/tools-for-AIs/ [6]: https://demonstrations.wolfram.com/ [7]: https://community.wolfram.com/content?curTag=staff%20picks Daniel Carvalho 2025-09-09T23:39:53Z https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/3576418 Asked for the indefinite integral ⌠ln(x+f) ⎮─────── dx ⌡ x+a Wolfram|Alpha returns ⎛ f+x⎞ ⎛a+x⎞ I(x) ≡ Li₂⎜- ───⎟ + log(f+x)log⎜───⎟ + const. ⎝ a-f⎠ ⎝a-f⎠ For `a = 1.2 - 3.4*i` and `f = 5.6 - 7.8*i`, computing the definite integral between x=2.1 and x=2.3 using this expression yields `I(2.3) - I(2.1) = -4.8411 - 11.4393 i`, as shown [here][1]. But, if instead Wolfram|Alpha is queried directly for the definite integral between x=2.1 and x=2.3, it returns `0.0937041 + 0.0475201 i`, as shown [here][2]. What is going on? The two methods of evaluation seem to agree for other integration bounds. E.g., for the integral between x=2.3 and x=2.5, both query types yield `0.0922966 + 0.0442528 i`, as shown [here][3] and [here][4]. Does anyone know what's happening for the integral between x=2.1 and x=2.3? I'm surprised that Wolfram|Alpha doesn't provide a robust answer as the integral in question arises in the fairly prosaic context of evaluating Re(f) ⌠ 1 ⌠ 1 ⎮ dx ─── ⎮ dy ─────────── ⌡ x+a ⌡ x+y+i*Im(f) [1]: https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=%20a%20=%201.2%20-%203.4*i;%20f%20=%205.6%20-%207.8*i;%20x_1=2.1,%20x_2=2.3;%20%28log%28%28a%20%2b%20x_2%29/%28a%20-%20f%29%29%20log%28f%20%2b%20x_2%29%20%2b%20Li_2%28-%28f%20%2b%20x_2%29/%28a%20-%20f%29%29%29%20-%20%28log%28%28a%20%2b%20x_1%29/%28a%20-%20f%29%29%20log%28f%20%2b%20x_1%29%20%2b%20Li_2%28-%28f%20%2b%20x_1%29/%28a%20-%20f%29%29%29 [2]: https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=integral%20from%202.1%20to%202.3%20of%20ln%28x%2b5.6%20-%207.8*i%29/%28x%2b1.2%20-%203.4*i%29%20dx [3]: https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=%20a%20=%201.2%20-%203.4*i;%20f%20=%205.6%20-%207.8*i;%20x_1=2.3,%20x_2=2.5;%20%28log%28%28a%20%2b%20x_2%29/%28a%20-%20f%29%29%20log%28f%20%2b%20x_2%29%20%2b%20Li_2%28-%28f%20%2b%20x_2%29/%28a%20-%20f%29%29%29%20-%20%28log%28%28a%20%2b%20x_1%29/%28a%20-%20f%29%29%20log%28f%20%2b%20x_1%29%20%2b%20Li_2%28-%28f%20%2b%20x_1%29/%28a%20-%20f%29%29%29 [4]: https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=integral%20from%202.3%20to%202.5%20of%20ln%28x%2b5.6%20-%207.8*i%29/%28x%2b1.2%20-%203.4*i%29%20dx Brent Page 2025-11-16T23:18:19Z https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/3573049 ![enter image description here][1] &[Wolfram Notebook][2] [1]: https://community.wolfram.com//c/portal/getImageAttachment?filename=1147hero.png&userId=20103 [2]: https://www.wolframcloud.com/obj/7e28e9f0-a042-4d25-8af5-7475ec706f1b Gay Wilson 2025-11-10T17:42:04Z https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/2843135 I have created a notebook on could as follows: > = Food Nutrition Label: Apple. In the output Nutrition Facts label has appeared. I have published the same. I have used the iframe in html. The same output is appearing in webpage. > <section class="py-2" id="Types"> > <div class="container"> > <iframe width='800' height='400' src='https://www.wolframcloud.com/obj/modakindia/Published/apple.nb' > frameborder='0'></iframe> > </div> </section> Screenshot for more accurate html ![enter image description here][1] The output is available in the link below. [https://nourishbodymind.blogspot.com/2023/02/crunch-into-juicy-sweetness-of-apples.html][2] I have some queries on the above. 1. The Label is not appearing in mobile screen as well. 2. The font size is not displaying properly due to large size. 3. All the values are not displaying which I got in the gadget "Food Nutrition Label". Need help. [1]: https://community.wolfram.com//c/portal/getImageAttachment?filename=Screenshot2023-03-03140601.jpg&userId=20103 [2]: https://nourishbodymind.blogspot.com/2023/02/crunch-into-juicy-sweetness-of-apples.html Swarup Modak 2023-03-03T07:02:18Z https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/907853 Can Wolfram solve these kind of "What do these words have in common" questions? For example given the words "Escape, Stall, Cradle, Press, Balance"; can it tell me that "They are all Wrestling Moves"? More examples... Q: Alchemy, Spell, Owl, Backstage, Mermaid, Squib, Scar, Usher, Gnome, A: Harry Potter and the Cursed Child Q: Emergency, Soap, Bones, Drive A: TV Shows Q: Torch, Tubes, Flashlight A: Spelunking Q: Full, Green, Halfway, Light, Tree, Ware A: They are all types of houses. Q: Arduous, Knight, Dragon, Chest, Map A: Quest Q: Flower, Tern, Thirsty A: Remove one letter from each word and they all spell a numeral. Q: Common, Friend, Pastry, Portable, Remote, Varnish A: If you take the "R" out, they still spell a word. Q: Banana, Dresser, Grammar, Potato, Revive, Uneven, Assess A: If you move the first letter to the end of the word, it forms the same word backwards. Banana = ananab, dresser = resserd, and so on. Q: Boro Bow Fluff Know Pickup Scoff Shoe Taut A: Rhyme with words that have different pronunciations of ough. Borough, bough, enough, dough, hiccough (hiccup), cough, through, bought. Q: Bother, Favorite, Mistake, Pastry, Portable, Product A: Each term contains two adjacent words if you allow the last letter of the first word to be the first letter of the last word. (i.e. bother = both + her; favorite = favor + rite; mistake = mist + take; pastry = past + try; portable = port + table; product = prod + duct) WordsIn Common 2016-08-18T22:41:29Z https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/3481794 ![enter image description here][1] Michael Trott was more than a brilliant scientist, he was a mentor, a friend, and a truly unique human being. For those of us lucky enough to work closely with him, his absence leaves a deep void. He brought an irreplaceable blend of curiosity, creativity, and humility to everything he did. Our long meetings, where we'd dive into unconventional ideas in physics and find ways to implement them in Mathematica, often stretched past hours, but no one ever minded. With Michael, even the most abstract idea could spark a new direction, a novel prototype, or an unexplored corner of science. He didn't just think outside the box, he rebuilt it entirely, quietly and kindly. His codes weren't always optimized for performance, but they were original and beautiful. I have never seen anyone so professional in prototyping novel ideas computationally; and this was our joint passion for Mathematica, as we believed it is one of the best tool, if not the best, for this purpose. One can find a few examples of Michael's style of thinking in the [Wolfram Blog][2], [Wolfram Demonstration Project][3], or [Wolfram Community][4]. He was also the author of four seminal books: "[The Mathematica GuideBooks][5]" (four volumes). He had a deep grasp of the history and architecture of Mathematica, with a passion for physics, especially quantum theory, and a genius for applying technology in unexpected ways. Michael Trott joined Wolfram Research in 1994 and was a cornerstone of the company for over 30 years. As Chief Scientist of Wolfram|Alpha, his fingerprints are on thousands of algorithms and innovations, from computational art to physical constants, from parsing human input to building bridges between theoretical physics and computation. The [Wolfram Quantum Framework][6], as a small example, would not have been possible without his support and contributions. Michael was encyclopedic in knowledge, yet endearingly humble. He read hundreds of papers, built massive daily digests on LLMs, mentored researchers across physics, math, and engineering; and still worried whether he had anything "original" to offer before a scheduled talk at the University of Vienna (see the material he'd prepared for this talk from [this link][7]; we even had a dry-run together, to discuss the content repeatedly). His presence was magnetic. He showed up early to Zoom calls (Wolfram Research has many remote employees, including myself, even before COVID pandemic) and sparked thoughtful conversation before meetings began. He didn't just build things but he shared them generously. He brought humanity to everything he touched. Whether discussing quantum fields or life under East Germany's Stasi, he made space for your story too. He helped others grow, quietly and consistently, always leading by example. Toward the end, we spoke about the multiverse; you were certain we'd meet again. In those final days, lying in your hospital bed, we found ourselves deep in conversation about the quantum-to-classical transition and nonlinearities. Thank you, Michael, for everything. You showed so many of us what it truly means to be both a scientist and a human being. [1]: https://community.wolfram.com//c/portal/getImageAttachment?filename=Screenshot2025-06-18at9.36.32%E2%80%AFPM.png&userId=1539902 [2]: https://blog.wolfram.com/author/michael-trott/ [3]: https://demonstrations.wolfram.com/authors/michael-trott [4]: https://community.wolfram.com/web/mtrott [5]: https://www.amazon.com/stores/author/B001ITTUVM/allbooks [6]: https://resources.wolframcloud.com/PacletRepository/resources/Wolfram/%5C%20QuantumFramework/ [7]: https://amoeba.wolfram.com/index.php/s/Jbrt4q6cYTN7rC7 Mohammad Bahrami 2025-06-19T04:38:05Z https://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/3552336 I'm trying to solve some problems with the Wolfram Problem Generator. After clearing some problems, I got into the question on the screenshot. The answer is correct, the normal Wolfram Alpha also says so, but the Wolfram Problem Generator is not able to parse the correct result? Am I doing something wrong? Is there a better way than writing the matrices code by hand? Because there are only options to create 2x2 and 3x3 matrices. ![Wolfram Problem Generator not able to parse matrices][1] [1]: https://community.wolfram.com//c/portal/getImageAttachment?filename=Screenshot2025-09-27at19-59-05WolframProblemGeneratorUnlimitedAI-generatedPracticeProblems.png&userId=3551794 Would love to get some feedback. I really don't know what I am doing wrong. There also aren't any strange characters there that could stop Wolfram Alpha from parsing it. Thank you for your help. M K 2025-09-27T18:04:18Z