Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove restriction on q in NonisotropicOrthogonalPolarGraph #29459

Open
ferihr mannequin opened this issue Apr 3, 2020 · 4 comments
Open

Remove restriction on q in NonisotropicOrthogonalPolarGraph #29459

ferihr mannequin opened this issue Apr 3, 2020 · 4 comments

Comments

@ferihr
Copy link
Mannequin

ferihr mannequin commented Apr 3, 2020

The restriction in the function NonisotropicOrthogonalPolarGraph in graphs/generators/classical_geometries.py to some specific small values in q is not necessary. The current code is as follows:

    if m % 2 == 0:
        if q in [2, 3]:
            G = _orthogonal_polar_graph(m, q, sign=sign, point_type=[1])
        else:
            raise ValueError("for m even q must be 2 or 3")
    elif not perp is None:
        if q == 5:
            G = _orthogonal_polar_graph(m, q, point_type=\
                [-1,1] if sign=='+' else [2,3] if sign=='-' else [])
            dec = ",perp"
        else:
            raise ValueError("for perp not None q must be 5")

One can easily make this work for general q. For q odd and m even, the point_type should be the set of nonzero squares in GF(q). For q odd and m odd, the two point types are either the set of all squares (so [-1,1] for q=5) and all non-squares (so [2, 3] for q=5). For q even, one can use the trace to do determine the point_type in a similar way.

Note that in the general case the graphs are no longer strongly regular.

CC: @dimpase @slel

Component: graph theory

Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/29459

@ferihr ferihr mannequin added this to the sage-9.1 milestone Apr 3, 2020
@ferihr ferihr mannequin added c: graph theory labels Apr 3, 2020
@slel
Copy link
Member

slel commented Apr 4, 2020

comment:1

Note: discussion on sage-devel, 2020-04:

@slel

This comment has been minimized.

@mkoeppe
Copy link
Member

mkoeppe commented Apr 14, 2020

comment:3

Batch modifying tickets that will likely not be ready for 9.1, based on a review of the ticket title, branch/review status, and last modification date.

@mkoeppe mkoeppe modified the milestones: sage-9.1, sage-9.2 Apr 14, 2020
@mkoeppe mkoeppe modified the milestones: sage-9.2, sage-9.3 Aug 29, 2020
@mkoeppe
Copy link
Member

mkoeppe commented Feb 13, 2021

comment:5

Setting new milestone based on a cursory review of ticket status, priority, and last modification date.

@mkoeppe mkoeppe modified the milestones: sage-9.3, sage-9.4 Feb 13, 2021
@mkoeppe mkoeppe modified the milestones: sage-9.4, sage-9.5 Jul 19, 2021
@mkoeppe mkoeppe modified the milestones: sage-9.5, sage-9.6 Dec 18, 2021
@mkoeppe mkoeppe modified the milestones: sage-9.6, sage-9.7 Apr 2, 2022
@mkoeppe mkoeppe modified the milestones: sage-9.7, sage-9.8 Aug 31, 2022
@mkoeppe mkoeppe removed this from the sage-9.8 milestone Jan 29, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants