>>> For example, suppose we are given labels {1,2} and {3,4},

 >> Do you want to say {1,2} is *one* label?

 > No, {1,2} should become the labels of the first isomorphism type
 > and {3,4} the labels of the second.

After that I could approximate what you were trying to convey by your 
first mail.

On 06/08/2007 08:59 PM, Martin Rubey wrote:
> Dear Ralf,
> 
> I continued to work on the multisort species, but now I have the following
> design problem:
> 
> a crucial step in producing the isomorphism types for the composition FoG is 
> to
> produce a multiset of isomorphismtypes of G, each structure having the same
> cardinality.  For example, suppose we are given labels {1,2} and {3,4}, and G
> is the species of graphs.  We have two isomorphismtypes, namely the graph with
> one edge and the graph without edges.  We now want to obtain three different
> sets, each containing two structures: (omitting many braces)
> 
> 1    3    1    3    1    3 
> |    |  , |      ,         
> 2    4    2    4    2    4
> 
> 
> Allowing repeated labels this is straightforward: I produce the
> isomorphismtypes of G[1,1], and then produce a multiset-composition of the
> result.  If all labels have to be distinct, I would have to relabel the
> structures, i.e., I would do it as follows:
>                                     1       1
> isomorphismTypes([1,2])$G returns   |  and  
>                                     2       2
> 
> multiset composition thereof returns
> 
> 1    1    1    1    1    1 
> |    |  , |      ,         
> 2    2    2    2    2    2 
> 
> relabel the structures to obtain
> 
> 1    3    1    3    1    3 
> |    |  , |      ,         
> 2    4    2    4    2    4
> 
> 
> Do we really want to do this?

I don't want this. I don't think it is good or even necessary to return 
something like

 > multiset composition thereof returns
 >
 > 1    1    1    1    1    1
 > |    |  , |      ,
 > 2    2    2    2    2    2

MultisetComposition should return a *representative* of an isomorphism 
type and therefore all labels would be different right away. There 
should be no need to do relabelling (which would be impossible anyway 
since you cannot distinguish the first 1 from the second 1).

Ralf

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
Aldor-combinat-devel mailing list
Aldor-combinat-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/aldor-combinat-devel

Reply via email to