0
Myvi Posted 15 years ago
Grammar
Is it ok?
"Also the W polynomial obtained (1.2) will be substituted into general formulae (1.3) and integrate them using MAPLE, so that the general predictor formulae of G method will be obtained in terms of w and v. For first-, second- and third-point G formulae, equation (1.3) will be integrated from 0 to 1, 0 to 2 and 0 to 3 respectively. The corresponding step size ratios for G formulae are w=1, w=2, w=3 and w=4. After complete substituting the possible step size ratios above, the predictor of G method could be gained and will be tabulated in Tables 34-36. Similarly, the general predictor formulae of G method could be expressed in a compact form as follows:"
Top answer
3) and integrate them using MAPLE, so that the general predictor formulae of the G method will be obtained in terms of w and v. 3) will be integrated from 0 to 1, 0 to 2 , and 0 to 3 respectively. The corresponding step-size ratios for G formulae are w=1, w=2, w=3 , and w=4.
- 3) and integrate them using MAPLE, so that the general predictor formulae of the G method will be obtained in terms of w and v.
- 3) will be integrated from 0 to 1, 0 to 2 , and 0 to 3 respectively.
- The corresponding step-size ratios for G formulae are w=1, w=2, w=3 , and w=4.
- After completely substituting the possible step-size ratios above, the G method predictor can be obtained and tabulated as in Tables 34-36.
- Similarly, the general predictor formulae of the G method can be expressed in a compact form as follows :
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
4 Answers
0
Also, the W polynomial obtained (1.2) will be substituted into general formulae (1.3) and integrate them using MAPLE, so that the general predictor formulae of the G method will be obtained in terms of w and v. For first-, second- and third-point G formulae, equation (1.3) will be integrated from 0 to 1, 0 to 2, and 0 to 3 respectively. The corresponding step-size rati
00
Sir, can I use word implies in this sentence?
"Let t=u which lead to dt=du is substituted in (1.1) implies p=2w+6y+7j"
"Let t=u which lead to dt=du is substituted in (1.1) implies p=2w+6y+7j"
00
It has other problems, but implication is the opposite of what mathematics is all about, isn't it? I really cannot make grammatical sense of your statement. Are either of these right?
Let t=u, which leads to dt=du, be substituted in (1.1) implying p=2w+6y+7j --??
Let t=u leads to dt=du, which is substituted in (1.1) and imp
Let t=u, which leads to dt=du, be substituted in (1.1) implying p=2w+6y+7j --??
Let t=u leads to dt=du, which is substituted in (1.1) and imp
00
Related Questions