[sage-devel] Fwd: [sage-trac] #30000: Implement a Q-curve test for elliptic curves over number fields

[John Cremona]

I woke up to see ticket #2 sitting there so could not resist.

-- Forwarded message -
From: sage-trac 
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2020 at 09:16
Subject: [sage-trac] #3: Implement a Q-curve test for elliptic
curves over number fields
To:


#3: Implement a Q-curve test for elliptic curves over number fields
+---
   Reporter:  cremona   | Type:  enhancement
 Status:  new   | Priority:  major
  Milestone:  sage-9.2  |Component:  elliptic curves
   Keywords:|Merged in:
Authors:|Reviewers:
Report Upstream:  N/A   |  Work issues:
 Branch:|   Commit:
   Dependencies:| Stopgaps:
+---
 An in teresting property of elliptic cuves over number fields is being a
 Q-curve (i.e. isogenous to all its Galois conjugates).  I am working on
 efficient ways to test this, have implsmented some, and will include it in
 Sage when done.

--
Ticket URL: 
Sage 
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-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/CAD0p0K7DXg3P94MorWvkzizkEzQAdBYj7sGb9cmGqsgmRkporw%40mail.gmail.com.

[sage-devel] Re: [sage-trac] #30000: Implement a Q-curve test for elliptic curves over number fields

[Kwankyu Lee]

On Saturday, June 27, 2020 at 5:18:26 PM UTC+9 john.c...@gmail.com wrote:

> I woke up to see ticket #2 sitting there so could not resist. 


Congratulation! By the ticket

#3 reported by John Cremona in the year 2020, 

you carved your honorable name into the history of SageMath.

We, the Sage users, thank you and all Sage developers who have contributed 
for the glory of SageMath!

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/cac8642b-e6c5-4805-920f-3fed0cac4d0cn%40googlegroups.com.

[sage-devel] is_line_graph() bug

[赵日天]

While running the code

for g in graphs():
print(g.is_line_graph())

Sage returns the error message, after lots of True-s and False-s:

---
Exception Traceback (most recent call last)
 in ()
  1 for g in graphs():
> 2 print(g.is_line_graph())
  3

/opt/sagemath-9.0/local/lib/python3.7/site-packages/sage/graphs/line_graph.pyx 
in sage.graphs.line_graph.is_line_graph 
(build/cythonized/sage/graphs/line_graph.c:2286)()
220 if g.is_connected():
221 try:
--> 222 R, isom = root_graph(g)
223 if certificate:
224 return True, R, isom

/opt/sagemath-9.0/local/lib/python3.7/site-packages/sage/graphs/line_graph.pyx 
in sage.graphs.line_graph.root_graph 
(build/cythonized/sage/graphs/line_graph.c:7147)()
621
622 if not is_isom:
--> 623 raise Exception(error_message)
624
625 return R, isom

Exception: It looks like there is a problem somewhere. Youfound a bug here 
! Please report it on sage-devel,our google group !

What's the bug here?

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/e2941e84-c1f8-48f5-adea-7a0b18353868o%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: We are approaching to the ticket #30000!

[kcrisman]

Still a while to ticket # 32768 though :-)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/cc065db1-0d7c-4a35-83fa-ecd0605b14dao%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [sage-devel] is_line_graph() bug

[Dima Pasechnik]

On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 10:35 AM 赵日天  wrote:
>
> While running the code
>
> for g in graphs():
> print(g.is_line_graph())
>
> Sage returns the error message, after lots of True-s and False-s:
>
> ---
> Exception Traceback (most recent call last)
>  in ()
>   1 for g in graphs():
> > 2 print(g.is_line_graph())
>   3
>
> /opt/sagemath-9.0/local/lib/python3.7/site-packages/sage/graphs/line_graph.pyx
>  in sage.graphs.line_graph.is_line_graph 
> (build/cythonized/sage/graphs/line_graph.c:2286)()
> 220 if g.is_connected():
> 221 try:
> --> 222 R, isom = root_graph(g)
> 223 if certificate:
> 224 return True, R, isom
>
> /opt/sagemath-9.0/local/lib/python3.7/site-packages/sage/graphs/line_graph.pyx
>  in sage.graphs.line_graph.root_graph 
> (build/cythonized/sage/graphs/line_graph.c:7147)()
> 621
> 622 if not is_isom:
> --> 623 raise Exception(error_message)
> 624
> 625 return R, isom
>
> Exception: It looks like there is a problem somewhere. Youfound a bug here ! 
> Please report it on sage-devel,our google group !
>
> What's the bug here?

A bug in is_line_graph() has recently been fixed here:
https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/29740
This fix should be in Sage 9.2.beta2


>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "sage-devel" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/e2941e84-c1f8-48f5-adea-7a0b18353868o%40googlegroups.com.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/CAAWYfq3PxOw6NFG%2Bw6ThMByDm9jW-LrA49ORT7BVqZRgF1ZOtA%40mail.gmail.com.

[sage-devel] Feedback needed on Vertex algebra implementation

['Reimundo Heluani' via sage-devel]

Dear all, this e-mail is mostly advertising ticket 


https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/29610

and asking for help. It is my hope that eventually some version of that ticket 
would make it to SageMath. 

I've implemented Vertex algebras, Lie Conformal Algebras and Poisson Vertex 
Algebras. Some of the description is in the ticket itself and most examples 
are in the manuals that are compiled mainly in the pages: 


http://potuz.net/reference/algebras/sage/algebras/vertex_algebras/vertex_algebra.html
http://potuz.net/reference/algebras/vertex_algebras/vertex_algebras.html
http://potuz.net/reference/algebras/lie_conformal_algebras/lie_conformal_algebras.html
http://potuz.net/reference/algebras/poisson_vertex_algebras/poisson_vertex_algebras.html

The patch is not small and is bound to have tons of mistakes/bugs. I'd love to 
hear any feedback you may have. 

I understand that reviewing this may be an ungratifying pain. It was suggested 
by Frédéric Chapoton and Travis Scrimshaw that I should break this patch in 
smaller pieces in order to get it reviewed. 

I am happy to do so, but before doing so I wanted to ask opinions here. In 
principle I could remove all examples of these algebras and leave one to 
doctest, then break into Lie conformal algebras + vertex algebras + poisson 
vertex algebras and try to remove the overlap between these classes: like 
lifting from a Lie conformal algebra to its universal enveloping algebra, or 
taking classical limits from a vertex algebra to a poisson vertex algebra, or 
the fact that Poisson vertex algebras are Lie conformal algebras and inherit 
some of the methods from that category, etc.


Now that I am writing this e-mail I realize that it may be a harder task than 
I thought. But the point I wanted to make/ask is whether or not this is worth 
it or even if it is a good model? It looks to me that it will put an 
unnecessary burden on my part with no gain for the reviewer (besides having 
less code to read). Maintaining it would be much harder, and the set of 
examples that the documentation would have would be much smaller. It also 
looks to me that is actually more error-prone to have bits an pieces of code 
carefully divided to not break something that was already working as a whole, 
and to finally have it assembled again. 

Please take a look at the above pages and you'll see quite a variety of 
examples, most, if not all, would be gone if I were to divide this into 
smaller pieces. I get the impression that this does a disservice to someone 
that wants to read the code. 

Anyway, 

I hope someone can take this up. As it stands now it is already useful to me 
and to my collaborators to have one repository from where they can clone that 
branch.


Best, 

R. 


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/20200628015056.GA1285038%40vertex.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature