intmath
宿題ヘルパー · 134.5K 月間訪問数
intmathは、AIを搭載した数学問題解決ツールおよびインタラクティブ学習プラットフォームです。基本的な代数から高度な微積分まで、幅広い数学問題に対して即座にステップバイステップの解答を提供します。写真による問題提出や24時間年中無休のオンデマンドチュータリングなどの機能を備え、学生の成績向上と数学への理解を深めることを目的としています。
製品概要
intmath 製品概要
intmathは、AIを搭載した数学問題解決ツールおよびインタラクティブ学習プラットフォームです。基本的な代数から高度な微積分まで、幅広い数学問題に対して即座にステップバイステップの解答を提供します。写真による問題提出や24時間年中無休のオンデマンドチュータリングなどの機能を備え、学生の成績向上と数学への理解を深めることを目的としています。
Preview
Math AI 製品概要
Math AIは、GPT-4を搭載したブラウザ拡張機能で、即座にAI数学問題を解決します。数学から物理、化学まで、ブラウザで宿題の問題をスクリーンショットするだけで、正確なステップバイステップの解答を得られます。単に答えを見つけるだけでなく、学生が複雑な概念を理解するのを助けるために設計されています。
Preview
Detailed feature comparison
| Feature | intmath | Math AI |
|---|---|---|
| 主要カテゴリー | 宿題ヘルパー | 宿題ヘルパー |
| 追加日 | 2025-08-04 | 2025-08-08 |
| 価格 | フリーミアム | フリーミアム |
| 公式サイト | www.intmath.com | mathai.online |
| 製品タイプ | ウェブサイト | ブラウザ拡張 |
| Performance data | ||
| ユーザー評価 | 未確認 | 未確認 |
| コメント | 0 | 0 |
| 月間訪問数 | 134.5K | 14.2K |
| 月間成長率 | 2.1% | -5.9% |
| お気に入り | 111 | 107 |
| Details | 詳細を見る | 詳細を見る |
intmath vs Math AI monthly traffic
Compare intmath and Math AI by monthly reach, traffic trend, visit depth, top regions, and acquisition sources.
How to interpret the traffic data
In the intmath vs Math AI monthly traffic comparison, intmath currently shows 134.5K visits and Math AI shows 14.2K; intmath has about 9.5 times the visible traffic of Math AI, an absolute difference of about 120.3K visits. This reflects visible reach, not feature quality or paid users.
Both tools provide verified traffic details, so monthly trends, visit depth, regions, and acquisition sources can be compared on the same basis.
intmath monthly traffic:
Latest traffic
月間訪問数
134.5K
平均滞在時間
0:44
訪問あたりページ数
2.32
直帰率
42.85%
Data updated 2026-06-15
Monthly traffic trend
- 2025/9: 203.4K 月間訪問数
- 2026/1: 182.8K 月間訪問数
- 2026/2: 131.8K 月間訪問数
- 2026/3: 135.7K 月間訪問数
- 2026/4: 131.7K 月間訪問数
- 2026/5: 134.5K 月間訪問数
主要地域
Top 5 countries/regions
| Country/region | Percentage | Traffic |
|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸United States | 52.74% | 70.9K |
| 🇮🇳India | 13.34% | 17.9K |
| 🇬🇧United Kingdom | 11.64% | 15.7K |
| 🇺🇿Uzbekistan | 11.38% | 15.3K |
| 🇩🇪Germany | 10.9% | 14.7K |
流入元
| Source type | Percentage | Traffic |
|---|---|---|
| ダイレクト | 75.96% | 102.2K |
| 参照元 | 21.7% | 29.2K |
| Eメール | 2.34% | 3.1K |
検索キーワード
domain and rangedomain and range of a functionpolar to rectangular calculatorsimpson's rulewhat is phase angle in circuit complex impedance
Math AI monthly traffic:
Latest traffic
月間訪問数
14.2K
平均滞在時間
0:45
訪問あたりページ数
1.64
直帰率
43.51%
Data updated 2026-06-15
Monthly traffic trend
- 2025/9: 15.6K 月間訪問数
- 2026/1: 22K 月間訪問数
- 2026/2: 16.8K 月間訪問数
- 2026/3: 17.3K 月間訪問数
- 2026/4: 15.1K 月間訪問数
- 2026/5: 14.2K 月間訪問数
主要地域
Top 5 countries/regions
| Country/region | Percentage | Traffic |
|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸United States | 83.35% | 11.8K |
| 🇦🇺Australia | 6.6% | 938 |
| 🇮🇳India | 3.85% | 547 |
| 🇨🇦Canada | 3.38% | 480 |
| 🇵🇭Philippines | 2.82% | 401 |
流入元
| Source type | Percentage | Traffic |
|---|---|---|
| ダイレクト | 92.57% | 13.2K |
| 参照元 | 4.81% | 683 |
| Eメール | 2.62% | 372 |
検索キーワード
ai math extensiongmath aimath aimathaimathimaticalcom
Traffic-based selection guidance: If public market visibility is an important first-pass criterion, investigate intmath first. The final choice should still follow taxonomy, use case, and a real trial because higher traffic does not prove broader capabilities or better workflow fit.
Usage comparison
Compare the core capabilities of intmath and Math AI
intmath Core features
宿題ヘルパー
問題解決
数学
Math AI Core features
宿題ヘルパー
問題解決
数学
Use cases
intmath Use cases
AIチューター
教育
宿題のヘルプ
数学ソルバー
ステップバイステップソリューション
代数学
微積分
インタラクティブ学習
問題解決
学生ツール
三角法
Math AI Use cases
AIチューター
教育
宿題のヘルプ
数学ソルバー
ステップバイステップソリューション
学業支援
ブラウザ拡張機能
化学ソルバー
GPT-4
物理ソルバー
学生ツール
intmath vs Math AI：In-depth comparison and selection guidance
First decide whether the products solve the same kind of need
This in-depth intmath vs Math AI comparison uses only the product records, taxonomy, audience, traffic, and community signals available on this page. intmath is primarily listed under “宿題ヘルパー”, while Math AI is primarily listed under “宿題ヘルパー”, so the first decision is whether your actual task matches their recorded scope.
The structured fields currently show these decision-relevant differences: Product type (intmath: Website; Math AI: Browser extension); Monthly visits (intmath: 134.5K; Math AI: 14.2K); Monthly growth (intmath: 2.1%; Math AI: -5.9%); Favorites (intmath: 111; Math AI: 107); Website (intmath: www.intmath.com; Math AI: mathai.online). These facts are more useful for selection than brand visibility alone.
What market visibility and monthly traffic mean
In the intmath vs Math AI monthly traffic comparison, intmath currently shows 134.5K visits and Math AI shows 14.2K; intmath has about 9.5 times the visible traffic of Math AI, an absolute difference of about 120.3K visits. This reflects visible reach, not feature quality or paid users.
Both tools provide verified traffic details, so monthly trends, visit depth, regions, and acquisition sources can be compared on the same basis.
If public market visibility is an important first-pass criterion, investigate intmath first. The final choice should still follow taxonomy, use case, and a real trial because higher traffic does not prove broader capabilities or better workflow fit.
Product positioning, use cases, and roles
intmath and Math AI currently overlap in shared categories: 宿題ヘルパー、問題解決、数学; shared tags: AIチューター、教育、宿題のヘルプ、数学ソルバー、ステップバイステップソリューション. This can place both on the same shortlist, but it does not prove equal implementation, depth, or cost.
intmath's unique categories/tags are 代数学、微積分、インタラクティブ学習、問題解決、学生ツール、三角法; Math AI's are 学業支援、ブラウザ拡張機能、化学ソルバー、GPT-4、物理ソルバー、学生ツール. These unique fields are the strongest differentiators: validate the product whose recorded scope matches the task instead of following traffic alone.
What ratings, comments, and favorites can tell you
intmath has no verified rating, 0 comments, 111 favorites, and 117 likes；Math AI has no verified rating, 0 comments, 107 favorites, and 124 likes。
Neither product has enough rating or comment samples for a credible reputation ranking.
Selection guidance by actual need
When to evaluate intmath first
Put intmath on the priority trial list when the task aligns with “宿題ヘルパー” and especially 代数学、微積分、インタラクティブ学習、問題解決、学生ツール、三角法. This follows recorded positioning and does not imply unlisted capabilities are absent.
intmath also currently records: pricing is freemium, product type is website, 134.5K verified monthly visits, no verified user rating. Verify any hard requirement around price, platform, or reach before trial, and do not let sparse review data substitute for testing.
When to evaluate Math AI first
Put Math AI on the priority trial list when the task aligns with “宿題ヘルパー” and especially 学業支援、ブラウザ拡張機能、化学ソルバー、GPT-4、物理ソルバー、学生ツール. This follows recorded positioning and does not imply unlisted capabilities are absent.
Math AI also currently records: pricing is freemium, product type is browser extension, 14.2K verified monthly visits, no verified user rating. Verify any hard requirement around price, platform, or reach before trial, and do not let sparse review data substitute for testing.
How to validate the recommendation before deciding
The available data describes positioning, public visibility, and community signals, but it cannot prove output quality, speed, integration effort, privacy, or long-term cost in your workflow. Before deciding, run the same representative tasks in intmath and Math AI, then record completion time, accuracy, manual corrections, and the real paid threshold. A like-for-like trial turns this comparison into a defensible adoption decision.
比較 FAQ
How should I choose between intmath and Math AI?
Compare positioning, pricing, taxonomy, and traffic maturity, then verify the latest details on each official website.
Where does this comparison data come from?
The factual baseline is derived from product, taxonomy, traffic, and community data. Reviewed editorial conclusions show their source and verification date.
What do unknown fields mean?
Unknown means there is not enough reliable evidence; the page does not fill gaps with assumptions.