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

Compute the Conway mass directly from the genus symbol. #29609

Closed
simonbrandhorst opened this issue Apr 28, 2020 · 21 comments
Closed

Compute the Conway mass directly from the genus symbol. #29609

simonbrandhorst opened this issue Apr 28, 2020 · 21 comments

Comments

@simonbrandhorst
Copy link

Conway and Sloane's formalism to compute the mass starts with their genus symbol.
Currently the quadratic forms code does this in a detour.

This ticket moves this functionality to the genus class where it really belongs. As a further advantage this allows to compute the mass of a genus without computing a representative first.

Component: quadratic forms

Author: Simon Brandhorst

Branch/Commit: 9b1bb8f

Reviewer: Frédéric Chapoton

Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/29609

@simonbrandhorst
Copy link
Author

@simonbrandhorst
Copy link
Author

Commit: fff7fa5

@simonbrandhorst

This comment has been minimized.

@simonbrandhorst
Copy link
Author

New commits:

fff7fa5Mass formula for genus symbols

@fchapoton
Copy link
Contributor

comment:3

patchbot's pyflakes plugin is not happy

@fchapoton
Copy link
Contributor

comment:4

typo "are taken crom"

Better avoid unicode dash between pages numbers in the reference file

@simonbrandhorst
Copy link
Author

comment:5

Note:
The mass computation should be correct. I compared mass computations for all genera of rank 3 and 4 and determinant < 1000 with magma.

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Apr 29, 2020

Changed commit from fff7fa5 to fcb9a7a

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Apr 29, 2020

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

fcb9a7aPyflakes and docs

@simonbrandhorst
Copy link
Author

comment:7

I guess in a follow up one could deprecate

conway_species_list_at_odd_prime, \
conway_species_list_at_2, \
conway_octane_of_this_unimodular_Jordan_block_at_2, \
conway_diagonal_factor, \
conway_cross_product_doubled_power, \
conway_type_factor, \
conway_p_mass, \
conway_standard_p_mass, \
conway_standard_mass, \

From my point of view the functions above have no value for themselves they are just intermediate results of the mass computation.

@fchapoton
Copy link
Contributor

comment:8

a few more comments:

  • Do you really need srange ?

  • The comment "# By conway-sloane we have to compensate the missing euler factors" could use capitals for names.

  • The 3 new raise statements must be doctested, for example raise ValueError("Genus must be definite.")

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented May 1, 2020

Changed commit from fcb9a7a to 1be5ffc

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented May 1, 2020

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

1be5ffcfollowed reviewers suggestions

@fchapoton
Copy link
Contributor

comment:13

You need only a single colon after TESTS here

+        TESTS::
+
+        Check a random genus magma::

Why did you keep the import of srange ?

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented May 1, 2020

Changed commit from 1be5ffc to 9b1bb8f

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented May 1, 2020

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

9b1bb8fremove srange

@simonbrandhorst
Copy link
Author

comment:15

Forgot to commit. Hope it is okay now.

@fchapoton
Copy link
Contributor

comment:16

ok, let it be. Too bad that you need the symbolic ring.

@fchapoton
Copy link
Contributor

Reviewer: Frédéric Chapoton

@simonbrandhorst
Copy link
Author

comment:17

Do you think it slows down things a lot?
I guess one could get rid of SR when combining factors correctly. But it is more work.

@vbraun
Copy link
Member

vbraun commented May 4, 2020

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

4 participants