#18749: Groebner basis computations with openf4 package
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: tcoladon | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_work
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-7.0
Component: packages: | Resolution:
optional | Merged in:
Keywords: F4, groebner | Reviewers: Martin Albrecht,
basis, ideal | Travis Scrimshaw, Jeroen Demeyer,
Authors: Titouan Coladon | Dima Pasechnik
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues: default algorithm
Branch: u/jdemeyer/f4 | choice
Dependencies: | Commit:
| 0da1853a76d06188a2cd6f608c6b3df406259cea
| Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by frederichan):
Replying to [comment:85 parisse]:
> If the default choice is reconsidered, then I would recommend to run
benchmarks in comparison with singular and giac. My own tests shows that
for Z/pZ, giac is faster than openf4 and requires much less memory (e.g.
less than 600M vs more than 20G for cyclic9). singular remains faster for
very sparse problems where f4 is not appropriate. Cf.
> http://www.cecm.sfu.ca/~rpearcea/mgb.html
I think that you are talking of giac > 1.2.2. Note that I have not yet
updated the spkg (giac 1.2.0.19) so it is a bit slower than openf4 for
cyclic9, but ram usage are indeed very different (for cyclic9 over GF(101)
top shows for giac 1.2.0 from sage around 1G but I saw top around 60Go
with openf4 from sage.)
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18749#comment:86>
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 https://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
