#10973: Integral points on elliptic curves over number fields
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
       Reporter:  justin                         |        Owner:  cremona
           Type:  enhancement                    |       Status:
       Priority:  major                          |  needs_review
      Component:  elliptic curves                |    Milestone:  sage-5.13
       Keywords:  sd32                           |   Resolution:
        Authors:  Justin Walker, Aly Deines,     |    Merged in:
  Jennifer Balakrishnan                          |    Reviewers:
Report Upstream:  N/A                            |  Work issues:
         Branch:                                 |       Commit:
   Dependencies:                                 |     Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------

Comment (by cremona):

 More seriously,
 {{{
 sage: E = EllipticCurve('9615d1)
 sage: E.integral_points()
 }}}
 seems to hang, thought I don't know why, while
 {{{
 sage: E = EllipticCurve('9615d1)
 sage: E.integral_points(algorithm="old")
 }}}
 is fine.  I think that this will need investigating before this can be
 merged.  Hence "needs work".

 I systematically checked all curves with conductor < 10000 with Magma
 V2.19-8.  Note that thaere have been a lot of improvements in Magma's
 algorithm, due to Steve DOnelly but not published, since this ticket was
 opened.  Not just bugfixes; but only over Q.

 With the old algorithm in Sage for N<10000 there are only 3 cases where
 Sage missed integral points.  Of these, 3 (6104b1, 8470g1 and 8470g2), are
 very easily fixed, simply by increasing the precision of the function
 {{{integral_points_with_bounded_mw_coeffs}}} from 100 to 200, thogh I have
 not done the necessary analysis to compute the actual precision required.
 The other one is 2082a1, where the MW group is cyclic of rank 1 and the
 integral multiples of the generator P are n*P for n=1,2,3,4,13, but the
 bound computed by the algorithm is 12.  It should be possible to find that
 bug using a detailed analysis of the implementation, but I have not done
 that yet (though I did find one small bug, in the formula for mu there
 should be b2/12 and not b2).

--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/10973#comment:44>
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 unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to