For the specific case you mentioned, wouldn't it be easier to make
.automorphisms() return a group? This way you can also work with relative
fields.
On Sunday, October 15, 2017 at 12:25:11 PM UTC-4, John Cremona wrote:
>
> Extracting information about a Galois group is more painful than it
> sh
The pari option essentially just identifies which group it is from a list,
and gives back some very basic data about the group. This is not always
easy to extract (see https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/24469). If you want
to do more, for example use group elements as automorphisms of the field,
y
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 7:41 PM, Jordan Argyle wrote:
> That makes sense--thank you! I think the Intel Compiler flag comes from the
> fact that I have a customized compiler through a program called MOOSE, and
> they all dev on macs, so the compiler may be trying to use their settings.
>
> I was in
Hi David,
On 2018-04-13, David Loeffler wrote:
> On 13 April 2018 at 12:25, Sanketh wrote:
>
>> This is probably obvious but why is type='gap' not standard for Galois
>> groups?
>>
>
> Because Pari is *vastly* faster. E.g. see this example, where Pari beats
> Gap by a factor of 100:
>
> sage: K.
Yup. Also, sage seems to have better support for gap groups. For instance,
sage: L. = NumberField(x^5 - x + 1)
> sage: L.galois_group(type='gap').group().is_abelian()
> False
> sage: L.galois_group(type='pari').group().is_abelian()
>
The difference is the time to fire up GAP.
Once GAP is started, there is not much difference
in time between computing with type='pari' or type='gap'.
$ sage -q
sage: K. = NumberField(x^5 - x - 1)
sage: %time K.galois_group(type='pari')
CPU times: user 3.5 ms, sys: 831 µs, total: 4.33 ms
Wall tim
On 13 April 2018 at 12:25, Sanketh wrote:
> This is probably obvious but why is type='gap' not standard for Galois
> groups?
>
Because Pari is *vastly* faster. E.g. see this example, where Pari beats
Gap by a factor of 100:
sage: K. = NumberField(x^5 - x - 1)
sage: time _=K.galois_group(type='p
This is probably obvious but why is type='gap' not standard for Galois
groups?
On Sunday, October 15, 2017 at 12:25:11 PM UTC-4, John Cremona wrote:
>
> Extracting information about a Galois group is more painful than it
> should be. After
>
> sage: K. = CyclotomicField(5)
> sage: G = K.galo
We had this discussion about SCIP licensing before...
Academy is f*ed up by the citation chase and the grant system...
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
On 13 April 2018 at 11:25, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On 13/04/2018 11:20, Francesco Biscani wrote:
>
>> http://scip.zib.de/academic.txt
>>
>> """
>> 1. This license applies to you only if you are a member of a noncommercial
>> and academic institution, e.g., a univ
On 13/04/2018 11:20, Francesco Biscani wrote:
http://scip.zib.de/academic.txt
"""
1. This license applies to you only if you are a member of a noncommercial
and academic institution, e.g., a university. The license expires as
soon as you are no longer a member of this institution.
"""
S
http://scip.zib.de/academic.txt
"""
1. This license applies to you only if you are a member of a noncommercial
and academic institution, e.g., a university. The license expires as
soon as you are no longer a member of this institution.
"""
So basically these acedemics, I imagine funded with
I will then try to get back to rc1.
Thank you all.
David.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this
13 matches
Mail list logo
