#13503: Enhancement of `is_triangle_free' addition of `triangles_count' and a 
minor
change in `spanning_trees_count'
----------------------------------------------------------+-----------------
       Reporter:  azi                                     |         Owner:  
jason, ncohen, rlm
           Type:  enhancement                             |        Status:  
needs_work        
       Priority:  minor                                   |     Milestone:  
sage-5.4          
      Component:  graph theory                            |    Resolution:      
              
       Keywords:  triangles, graphs, number of triangles  |   Work issues:      
              
Report Upstream:  N/A                                     |     Reviewers:      
              
        Authors:  Jernej Azarija, David Coudert           |     Merged in:      
              
   Dependencies:                                          |      Stopgaps:      
              
----------------------------------------------------------+-----------------

Comment (by dcoudert):

 >     * Where did you find that this "abs" was not needed ? I thought it
 was `O_o`

 It was in the original patch  from Jernej Azarija
 ([trac_17334_triangle_free_speedup.patch]). I don't know if its true or
 not, and since the gain is very limited, we could put it back to be on the
 safe side.

 >     * I'm not a big fan of having triangle_count in generic_graph, as I
 don't really see it used with DiGraphs... And the code reflects that
 indeed, but if you think they can, then why not ? Could you at least say
 that not all algorithms are available for Digraphs, and that the method
 looks for "directed C3" in this case, or something similar ? And in
 particular not C3 in the underlying graph.

 Jernej should answer that remark.


 >     * "tests if the trace of the adjacency matrix is positive" would be
 counting the number of loops `:-D` Btw I guess it would be better to have
 "``return (A * * 3 ).trace() == 0``" instead of "``return (A*A*A).trace()
 == 0``", just in case they might implement some smart thing for powers of
 binary matrices eventually... The logarithmic power method changes nothing
 for `k=3` `:-)`

 OK.

 I have implemented some of the modifications.

 > Thanks for that patch !!

 I was also thinking of some nice and fast methods from Alon et al., or
 from Latapy (see the code in c and the survey at [http://www-
 rp.lip6.fr/~latapy/Triangles/]). We could add them (in particular the
 compact-forward method) at the cost of adding an interface and a method
 for converting the graph into the tricky data structure used by Latapy.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/13503#comment:26>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica, 
and MATLAB

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-trac" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.

Reply via email to