On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 11:12:12AM -0800, William Stein wrote:
> On Dec 15, 2007 7:19 AM, Joel B. Mohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hmm, this is interesting.  Singular may be frightening for factoring with 
> > some
> > big bad examples, but it seems we've got some work to do for the small 
> > cases.
> > sage: R.<y,z>=QQ[] # singular
> > sage: r=y^37-1
> > sage: timeit r.factor()
> > 1000 loops, best of 3: 1.04 ms per loop
> > sage: S.<x>=ZZ[] # NTL, but the factoring code converts to pari.
> > sage: s=x^37-1
> > sage: timeit s.factor()
> > 100 loops, best of 3: 5.2 ms per loop
> > The moral might be:  conversions are costly (but we already knew that).
> 
> Note that NTL does implement factoring in ZZ[] and moreover it does
> so asymptotically *very* quickly.  It's only for small degree where I
> once noticed pari being faster and made that the default -- and maybe
> that had to do with bad turning when building NTL!  So you might
> want to consider wrapping ZZ[] factoring via NTL, which I'm sure you
> can easily do since you led the charge for rewraping all of NTL!

Yeah, I thought about doing that and started looking at ZZX factor stuff.  Is 
there an arbitrary factoring function?  All I could find is factoring for 
special cases (square-free, etc) and I was too lazy to try and figure out what 
I 
was supposed to do.  I'll be looking into this further.

> > So far, my mpoly over ZZ factoring code reduces to a univariate and factors
> > that.  Profiling indicates that the univariate factoring is a significant
> > hunk of my time -- I guess that means my all-python book-keeping is
> > respectable.  Oh, and my kroneckers trick algorithm for my special case
> > absolutely clobbers singular, but I don't think that is really a great 
> > shock.
> 
> Nice!  How does it compare to Maple and Magma and Reduce?

Note too good yet.  And, actually singular beats me for simpler polynomials -- 
it's just my bizarre polynomials that singular can't handle that I beat 
singular 
with.

I'm sure a cython-ing would help it out since there's a non-trivial amount of 
book-keeping with the exponents.  However, I can't believe that this simple 
trick is the best we can do with mpoly factoring.  I think it may turn out to 
be 
a nice thing to have around for special cases though.

--
Joel

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to