rburing's profile - activity

Hi David. Sounds like a nice project. You might also want to ask on sage-devel.

Probably you should use somewhere that the a[i] are roots; currently they don't satisfy any non-trivial polynomial equat

Congratulations!

It seems that the BooleanPolynomialRing constructor doesn't accept a map object as a list of variable names, only string

Can you convert it to an element of a polynomial ring? (Or better yet, create it as such in the first place.) Then it's

Can you convert it to an element of a polynomial ring? Then it's easy. Please post some of the terms, to make the questi

See the category of number fields: sage: NumberField(x^2 + 1, 'a') in NumberFields() True

Here you go: m = 5 Zm = Zmod(m) L = [Zm(1), Zm(-1)] K.<z> = CyclotomicField(m) power_list = [z^k for k in range(m

Here you go: m = 5 Zm = Zmod(m) L = [Zm(1), Zm(-1)] K.<z> = CyclotomicField(m) power_basis = [z^k for k in range(

Indeed, if you want to plot $g(x)$, the expression $g(x)$ should evaluate to a number when $x$ is a number. You correctl

You can install openmpi using your system's package manager, and run sage -pip install mpi4py to install mpi4py. The

Also, to use Sage stuff in your Python script you should do import sage.all first. Then the above instructions seem to w

The optional mpi4py package was deleted because it didn't build with Python 3 back then. That is already long ago, and m

Indeed, H.gen(0).parent() is G being True seems fishy.

There seems to be a bug in the subgroup method: H should consist of [1, f^2, f^4]. Edit: this assumed the f in H is the

There seems to be a bug in the subgroup method: H should consist of [1, f^2, f^4]. Edit: this assumed the f in H is the

You're welcome! I just changed the name of the function because it's really calculating a reduced Groebner basis. Anyway

It seems like there is no such option. However we can program it ourselves: from sage.misc.verbose import verbose def

There seems to be a bug in the subgroup method: H should consist of [1, f^2, f^4].

It seems like there is no such option. However we can program it ourselves: from sage.misc.verbose import verbose def

For implementing this in SageMath I opened https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/31989

It seems not. There is Magma code in the master's thesis Implementation of a Thue-Mahler equation solver by Kyle Hambroo

I'm not sure why this hasn't been implemented in SageMath. It's probably an oversight rather than being due to any diffi

The SageMath result (output of your code in SageMath 9.2) has coefficient a $2/5$ instead of the $2/15$ you claim: sage

The limitation is probably due to Singular having that limitation. Maybe try CoCoA.

The reason for the results is that callable symbolic expressions are defined by interpreting the input variables as symb

You can use polynomial rings over polynomial rings: A.<a1,b1,c1,d1> = PolynomialRing(QQ, order='lex') B.<a2,b2

The program used to display this is three.js, so this is more of a question for them (e.g. (M+N).show(viewer='tachyon')

You can define P = var('P', latex_name=r'\pmb{\mathscr{P}}'), which displays as $\pmb{\mathscr{P}}$.

This seems to be a bug in Maxima, now reported as #3799 fourier_elim returns non-(in)equations.

I don't know why this conversion isn't implemented. But you can use the from_polynomial method instead: sage: s.from_po

You can do conversion: R(g) or g = R(g) However it is often better to avoid the symbolic ring altogether, if possi

In the past 8 years there have been some changes to SageMath, so it is understandable that this code no longer works. Th

A single argument consisting of a list or a tuple is not accepted as input. Only keyword arguments or n positional argum