ERF.PRECISE
Supported, behaves as documentedCategory: Engineering · Last tested 2026-09-01
Real compatibility results for the ERF.PRECISE function: executed in Excel for the web, Google Sheets and LibreOffice Calc, with desktop Excel behavior from Microsoft’s official documentation (we do not run desktop Excel — Excel for the web is a different application and is executed separately). Syntax and links to that documentation are below.
Support matrix
| Engine | Documented | Live-tested | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| Excel (desktop) | Yes | No — documented only | n/a |
| Excel for the web | — | Yes (recalc, 2026-09-01) | Supported, behaves as documented |
| Google Sheets | Yes | Yes (Drive import, 2026-08-31) | Supported, behaves as documented |
| LibreOffice Calc | Yes | Yes (25.8.7.3, 2026-08-31) | Supported, behaves as documented |
LibreOffice version history
We executed the same test cases under each LibreOffice release to show exactly when ERF.PRECISE’s support changed — not documentation claims, real results.
| LibreOffice version | Verdict | Tested |
|---|---|---|
| 24.2.0.3 | Supported, behaves as documented | 2026-08-31 |
| 24.8.7.2 | Supported, behaves as documented | 2026-08-31 |
| 25.2.0.3 | Supported, behaves as documented | 2026-08-31 |
| 25.8.7.3 | Supported, behaves as documented | 2026-08-31 |
Executed test cases
Excel for the web (executed 2026-09-01 via OneDrive recalculation)
These values come from Excel for the web, not from desktop Excel. They are two different implementations of the calculation engine, and this run measured only the web one: the corpus was uploaded to OneDrive as .xlsx, recalculated by Excel for the web on open, and downloaded again for readback. Excel for the web is a rolling service with no pinnable version, so the run is identified by its date. Where a value here disagrees with the Expected column — which is Microsoft’s documentation of the desktop product — we cannot tell you whether the web engine diverges from the desktop one or the documentation is wrong about both, because we do not run desktop Excel.
| Formula | Description | Result | Expected | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| =ROUND(ERF.PRECISE(0.745),8) | Microsoft's documented worked example | 0.70792892 | 0.70792892ProvenanceMicrosoft's page publishes '=ERF.PRECISE(0.745)' with the result 0.70792892. Re-derived independently with mpmath at 50 decimal digits (not the library that authored the corpus's other values): erf(0.745) = 0.70792892009573768414 and erf(1) = 0.84270079294971486934, which round to the published 0.70792892 and 0.84270079 at 8 dp exactly. |
Matched |
| =ROUND(ERF.PRECISE(1),8) | Microsoft's documented worked example | 0.84270079 | 0.84270079ProvenanceMicrosoft's page publishes '=ERF.PRECISE(1)' with the result 0.84270079. Re-derived independently with mpmath at 50 decimal digits (not the library that authored the corpus's other values): erf(0.745) = 0.70792892009573768414 and erf(1) = 0.84270079294971486934, which round to the published 0.70792892 and 0.84270079 at 8 dp exactly. |
Matched |
| =ROUND(ERF.PRECISE(1)-ERF(1),12) | The two functions agree on the one-argument form | 0 | 0ProvenanceBoth pages publish 0.84270079 for an argument of 1, and ERF.PRECISE's syntax section documents a single argument x described, word for word, as "The lower bound for integrating ERF.PRECISE" -- the same wording ERF uses for its own first argument. The difference of the two is therefore exactly zero, and asserting the DIFFERENCE rather than two separate values catches an engine that implements one of them with a different algorithm at a precision no published 8-decimal figure would reveal. |
Matched |
| =ERF.PRECISE("abc") | A non-numeric argument | #VALUE! | #VALUE!ProvenanceExcel documents: "If lower_limit is nonnumeric, ERF.PRECISE returns the #VALUE! error value." |
Matched |
Google Sheets (executed 2026-08-31 via Drive import)
Google Sheets is a rolling service with no pinnable version, so this run is identified by its date. The corpus was imported to Drive as .xlsx, recalculated by Sheets, and exported back for readback.
| Formula | Description | Result | Expected | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| =ROUND(ERF.PRECISE(0.745),8) | Microsoft's documented worked example | 0.70792892 | 0.70792892ProvenanceMicrosoft's page publishes '=ERF.PRECISE(0.745)' with the result 0.70792892. Re-derived independently with mpmath at 50 decimal digits (not the library that authored the corpus's other values): erf(0.745) = 0.70792892009573768414 and erf(1) = 0.84270079294971486934, which round to the published 0.70792892 and 0.84270079 at 8 dp exactly. |
Matched |
| =ROUND(ERF.PRECISE(1),8) | Microsoft's documented worked example | 0.84270079 | 0.84270079ProvenanceMicrosoft's page publishes '=ERF.PRECISE(1)' with the result 0.84270079. Re-derived independently with mpmath at 50 decimal digits (not the library that authored the corpus's other values): erf(0.745) = 0.70792892009573768414 and erf(1) = 0.84270079294971486934, which round to the published 0.70792892 and 0.84270079 at 8 dp exactly. |
Matched |
| =ROUND(ERF.PRECISE(1)-ERF(1),12) | The two functions agree on the one-argument form | 0 | 0ProvenanceBoth pages publish 0.84270079 for an argument of 1, and ERF.PRECISE's syntax section documents a single argument x described, word for word, as "The lower bound for integrating ERF.PRECISE" -- the same wording ERF uses for its own first argument. The difference of the two is therefore exactly zero, and asserting the DIFFERENCE rather than two separate values catches an engine that implements one of them with a different algorithm at a precision no published 8-decimal figure would reveal. |
Matched |
| =ERF.PRECISE("abc") | A non-numeric argument | #VALUE! | #VALUE!ProvenanceExcel documents: "If lower_limit is nonnumeric, ERF.PRECISE returns the #VALUE! error value." |
Matched |
LibreOffice Calc 25.8.7.3 (tested 2026-08-31)
| Formula | Description | Result | Expected | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| =ROUND(ERF.PRECISE(0.745),8) | Microsoft's documented worked example | 0.70792892 | 0.70792892ProvenanceMicrosoft's page publishes '=ERF.PRECISE(0.745)' with the result 0.70792892. Re-derived independently with mpmath at 50 decimal digits (not the library that authored the corpus's other values): erf(0.745) = 0.70792892009573768414 and erf(1) = 0.84270079294971486934, which round to the published 0.70792892 and 0.84270079 at 8 dp exactly. |
Matched |
| =ROUND(ERF.PRECISE(1),8) | Microsoft's documented worked example | 0.84270079 | 0.84270079ProvenanceMicrosoft's page publishes '=ERF.PRECISE(1)' with the result 0.84270079. Re-derived independently with mpmath at 50 decimal digits (not the library that authored the corpus's other values): erf(0.745) = 0.70792892009573768414 and erf(1) = 0.84270079294971486934, which round to the published 0.70792892 and 0.84270079 at 8 dp exactly. |
Matched |
| =ROUND(ERF.PRECISE(1)-ERF(1),12) | The two functions agree on the one-argument form | 0 | 0ProvenanceBoth pages publish 0.84270079 for an argument of 1, and ERF.PRECISE's syntax section documents a single argument x described, word for word, as "The lower bound for integrating ERF.PRECISE" -- the same wording ERF uses for its own first argument. The difference of the two is therefore exactly zero, and asserting the DIFFERENCE rather than two separate values catches an engine that implements one of them with a different algorithm at a precision no published 8-decimal figure would reveal. |
Matched |
| =ERF.PRECISE("abc") | A non-numeric argument | #VALUE! | #VALUE!ProvenanceExcel documents: "If lower_limit is nonnumeric, ERF.PRECISE returns the #VALUE! error value." |
Matched |
Docs & syntax
- Excel (desktop): official documentation
- Google Sheets: official documentation
- LibreOffice Calc: official documentation