Example 1
The numerical approximation of used as a root selector is not helpful in distinguishing between the two roots, since both roots are a distance of exactly from
>
|
|
| (2.1) |
Solution
Use a different value as the root selector:
>
|
|
| (2.2) |
Example 2
>
|
|
| (2.4) |
>
|
|
| (2.5) |
The numeric selector, , is not sufficient to distinguish whether is the positive or negative root. Therefore, the following gcd computation is ambiguous: if represents the positive root, then the GCD is , but if represents the negative root, then the GCD is 1. Hence an error is raised:
>
|
|
Solution
If you use a different selector that is not ambiguous, you can get an answer. Here, we use index=1 and index=2.
>
|
|
| (2.6) |
>
|
|
| (2.7) |
>
|
|
We've specified two distinct roots, and their gcd is 1.
Example 3
>
|
|
Solution
This is the same root selector problem as in example 1. As was done for that example, by choosing a different numeric selector for the RootOf, the specification is no longer ambiguous:
>
|
|
| (2.9) |