#7575: EllipticCurve.gens: height bounds not handled well in two_descent
-------------------------------+--------------------------------------------
   Reporter:  rlm              |       Owner:  cremona   
       Type:  defect           |      Status:  needs_info
   Priority:  major            |   Milestone:  sage-4.3.1
  Component:  elliptic curves  |    Keywords:            
Work_issues:                   |      Author:            
   Upstream:  N/A              |    Reviewer:            
     Merged:                   |  
-------------------------------+--------------------------------------------

Comment(by cremona):

 In the original example (in this ticket's description), note that calling
 E.two_descent() produces output to the screen but returns nothing and
 stores nothing in E which was not there before.  E.gens() by default uses
 mwrank_shell, which does not allow any passing of parameters (see the TODO
 block in the docstring), not because it cannot be done but because we have
 not implemented it.  The non-default option mwrank_lib goes via creation
 of the associated mwrank_curve which also does not allow changing of the
 parameters.

 What I suggest is that we use mwrank_lib by default;  that we allow
 passing of all the parameters which the two_descent function of an mwrank
 elliptic curve allows from all higher level functions which call mwrank
 (e.g. gens()) and that we use the enquiry functions provided by mwrank to
 find out how successful it has been:  it can give you a lower and upper
 bound for the rank, so all is well if they are equal and in any case can
 give you a number of gens equal to the lower bound.  The only difficulty
 would be with caching rank and gens -- probably best not to do so at all
 unless we have certainly found them.

 Does this all make sense?  I think it would be much more helpful to have
 sample curves where things do not work well and sample code which does not
 go via a call to the (presumably complicated) function prove_BSD()!

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7575#comment:2>
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 post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.


Reply via email to