#10553: Diamond bracket operators are terribly slow
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
   Reporter:  mderickx       |       Owner:  craigcitro
       Type:  enhancement    |      Status:  new       
   Priority:  major          |   Milestone:            
  Component:  modular forms  |    Keywords:            
     Author:                 |    Upstream:  N/A       
   Reviewer:                 |      Merged:            
Work_issues:                 |  
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
 I was wondering why it took so much longer to get a diamond bracket
 operator on a cuspidal supspace then a hecke operator. I dived into it,
 and the difference is, that for hecke operators it is not checked if the
 cuspidal subspace really is a subspace but for diamond bracket operators
 it is checked.

 The example below sows the possibillity of a large speed improvement since
 the theory already tells that the diamond bracket operators will also act
 on the cuspidal subspace.

 {{{
 sage: M=ModularSymbols(Gamma1(97),sign=1)
 sage: S=M.cuspidal_submodule()
 sage: d=M.diamond_bracket_operator(3).matrix()
 sage: time d.restrict(Smod,check=False)
 CPU times: user 0.42 s, sys: 0.08 s, total: 0.50 s
 Wall time: 0.68 s
 345 x 345 dense matrix over Rational Field
 sage: time d.restrict(Smod,check=True)
 CPU times: user 74.42 s, sys: 0.52 s, total: 74.94 s
 Wall time: 75.42 s
 }}}

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10553>
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