#6337: Implement jordan_form over symbolic ring
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: was | Owner: was
Type: defect | Status: needs_work
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.9
Component: linear algebra | Resolution:
Keywords: | Merged in:
Authors: Peter Bruin | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
u/pbruin/6337-jordan_form_symbolic | c0d9003d79720defaf8651ee3ff57073262cdb45
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Changes (by cpernet):
* status: needs_review => needs_work
Comment:
This looks fine to me.
Replying to [comment:8 rws]:
> Replying to [comment:3 darij]:
> > I agree that the symbolic ring is inexact, and that Jordan normal form
requires exactness...
> So this would be invalid now?
The Jordan normal form does not require more "exactness" from the ring as
do the eigenvalues which are already implemented for symbolic matrices
(calling maxima). Hence I see no point in discussing whether or not we
should offer a jordan_form method for symbolic matrices, it seems natural
to do it as what is proposed here.
Just one thing: to be consistent with what is returned over other
coefficient domains, the Jordan form should display the subdivision of the
block matrix.
{{{#!python
sage: a = matrix(QQ,3,[1,0,1,0,2,0,0,0,1])
sage: a.jordan_form()
[2|0 0]
[-+---]
[0|1 1]
[0|0 1]
}}}
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/6337#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.
