#16714: Add a matrix of constraints in a LP
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: ncohen | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.3
Component: linear | Resolution:
programming | Merged in:
Keywords: | Reviewers:
Authors: | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Commit:
Branch: | 846cba629c68e46f274de8d6cbbaabd3cdbb0a99
u/vbraun/add_a_matrix_of_constraints_in_a_lp| Stopgaps:
Dependencies: |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by dimpase):
Replying to [comment:14 ncohen]:
> > BTW, using LP for this is a very inefficient thing.
>
> How do you think you can prove this assertion ? Especially when the
polytope of perfect matchings in a bipartite graph is integer ?..
>
> > The classical combinatorial algorithms (see e.g.
[http://equatorialmaths.wordpress.com/2009/09/23/hungarian-algorithm-
take-1/ Hungarian method]) will be much faster...
>
> Claim without proof. Also, this isn't implemented, lest of all
efficiently implemented.
Come on, it is implemented e.g. here:
[http://networkx.github.io/documentation/latest/reference/generated/networkx.algorithms.matching.maximal_matching.html#networkx.algorithms.matching.maximal_matching
networkx]
Convert your graph into networkx one and call it...
Although indeed this might not be the fastest implementation around, sure.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16714#comment:15>
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.
