#16503: q-x construction of Orthogonal Arrays
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
       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/16503     |  71dad5d46b3fe7b343962974a75a9c199e0904a6
   Dependencies:  #16500             |     Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Comment (by ncohen):

 Hello !

 > 1) One lines 656-659 you have an import followed by a commented check!!
 > {{{
 > from sage.combinat.designs.bibd import _check_pbd
 > PBD = [[relabel[xx] for xx in B if not xx in points_to_delete] for B in
 TD]
 >
 > # _check_pbd(PBD,n,[q,q-x-1,q-x+1,x+2])
 > }}}
 > why is that?

 It is something I used while implementing the construction and as it said
 something about the PBD I left it. I updated that comment as that troubled
 you.

 > 2) This is wrong (lines 730-731)
 > {{{
 > # The next is always True, because q is a prime power
 > # orthogonal_array(k+1,q,existence=True) and
 > }}}

 The line before that one is

 {{{
             orthogonal_array(k+1,q-x+1,existence=True) and
 }}}

 > 3) I bounced into something bad: I wanted to change in
 `find_recursive_construction` the
 > {{{
 > assert k >= 3
 > }}}
 > into a
 > {{{
 > assert k > 3, "you do not need recursion for k<4"
 > }}}
 > since it is trivial to build one latin square. But it appears that the
 recursive constructions is called with k=3 many times! so bad! This has to
 be corrected... but hopefully, not here. I guess that #16535 would be the
 good place.

 Why in #16535 ? What we need to do is add a case for k=3 in the
 `orthogonal_array` constructor.

 I fixed the things above, plus an apparently incorrect `1<x`.

 Nathann

--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16503#comment:7>
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.

Reply via email to