#16391: Helper functions for OA constructions
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: ncohen | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.3
Component: combinatorial | Resolution:
designs | Merged in:
Keywords: | Reviewers:
Authors: Nathann Cohen | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Commit:
Branch: u/ncohen/16391 | d0885f7944ac0cb5f5ddb6822544f9059596ba67
Dependencies: #16370 | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by ncohen):
Yo !
> Some small changes in u/vdelecroix/16391 (above your last commit). The
modification of the `NOTE` is the most important one (it was wrong
before).
Was it ? I thought that your version was wrong too, so I added a commit.
What do you think ?
> I really do not like the fact that `designs.orthogonal_array` return
list of lists while `designs.incomplete_orthogonal_array` returns tuple of
tuples. Can we make all tuple of tuples (at least in a later ticket)?
I do not want any of them to be tuples. I have no other choice but to make
them tuples because nobody is willing to review #16353 which would let me
cache only boolean answers (meaning that the constructors could all return
lists of lists as it would be best).
If #16353 is not reviewed I will have no other choice but to implement a
chaching method for all three constructors (with a common cache) for
booleans answers, and of course yet another one for this function.
Which is a sheer waste of time.
> Beyond that, I am happy with the ticket.
Tell me if you are okay with this additional commit !
> PS: the search of disjoint blocks for the OA(4,10) is '''much''' faster
using increasing values of `x` instead of a `set_objective`...
That's because when you give it the number of disjoint blocks it does not
have to prove that you cannot find a strictly larger set of blocks by
itself. If `k` is the largest amount of disjoint blocks in a `OA(4,10)`
try with value `k+1`. Should take the same time.
Nathann
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16391#comment:32>
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/d/optout.
