#9645: Bugs in the computation of Groebner bases over the integers
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Reporter: SimonKing | Owner:
Type: defect | duleorlovic
Priority: critical | Status: new
Component: commutative algebra | Milestone: sage-6.4
Keywords: Groebner basis integer | Resolution:
Authors: | Merged in:
Report Upstream: Fixed upstream, in a later | Reviewers:
stable release. | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Changes (by jakobkroeker):
* cc: jpflori (added)
Comment:
In sage Singular was recently upgraded to 3.1.7.
1. What I do not understand, a slimgb call in standalone Singular 3.1.7
raises now an error
{{{
ring rng = integer,(x,y),dp;
option("redSB");
ideal I = 4*x^2*y^2 + 2*x*y^3 + 3*x*y, 2*x^2 + x*y, 2*y^2;
slimgb(I);
//? not implemented for rings with rings as coeffients}}}
}}}
but the slimgb call in sage
{{{
sage: R.<x,y>=PolynomialRing(ZZ,2)
sage: I = R*(4*x^2*y^2+2*x*y^3+3*x*y,2*x^2+x*y,2*y^2)
sage: I.groebner_basis(algorithm='libsingular:slimgb')
}}}
succeeds. Why is that ??
2. if there is really a difference between strong and weak groebner basis,
then at least the 'toy:buchberger','toy:buchberger2' and 'groebner_basis'
documentation should be updated ,
hoping that nobody intermixes weak and strong groebner bases by accident.
(new ticket?)
3. Remark: the liftstd bug seems fixed
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/9645#comment:12>
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.
