#18589: isogeny efficiency improvement
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Reporter: | Owner:
cremona | Status: needs_review
Type: | Milestone: sage-6.8
enhancement | Resolution:
Priority: major | Merged in:
Component: | Reviewers: Jeroen Demeyer
elliptic curves | Work issues:
Keywords: | Commit:
isogeny | 2f83c20a3753b9141c635ab26ed88015a9fed499
Authors: John | Stopgaps:
Cremona |
Report Upstream: N/A |
Branch: |
u/cremona/18589 |
Dependencies: |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Changes (by jdemeyer):
* reviewer: => Jeroen Demeyer
Comment:
Replying to [comment:40 cremona]:
> Me too, but as I tried to explain the script I was running was computing
the isogeny class many times. I am rerunning just E.isogeny_class() under
6.7 now and will report back (but this ticket need not wait).
I agree that this ticket makes sense by itself. It's just that it only
does some easy optimizations, it doesn't fundamentally improve the
algorithm.
I have been thinking a bit about the computation of `mult()` this
afternoon and I might have an idea to compute `mult^-1(f)` (that is, find
`g` such that `mult(g) == f`) much faster than the current `mult()`. Of
course, theoretically, `mult()` and `mult^-1()` play the same role.
I'm wondering if it's worth pursuing further and for that I need to know
if `mult()` is ever the bottleneck of the algorithm. (this is of course
for a hypothetical follow-up ticket)
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18589#comment:43>
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.
