Opened 8 years ago
Last modified 5 years ago
#12204 needs_work enhancement
Reducing the defining polynomial of a hyperelliptic curve
Reported by: | florian | Owned by: | was |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | sage-6.4 |
Component: | number theory | Keywords: | hyperelliptic curves sd35 sd51 |
Cc: | Merged in: | ||
Authors: | Florian Bouyer | Reviewers: | Marco Streng |
Report Upstream: | N/A | Work issues: | need to recheck once dependencies are finalised |
Branch: | Commit: | ||
Dependencies: | #6341, #14755, #14756 | Stopgaps: |
Description (last modified by )
A method which reduces the height of the polynomial defining a Hyperelliptic curve over the rationals
- Apply patch 12204_reduce_height.patch
Attachments (3)
Change History (16)
Changed 8 years ago by
comment:1 Changed 8 years ago by
- Status changed from new to needs_review
comment:2 Changed 8 years ago by
comment:3 Changed 8 years ago by
- Description modified (diff)
comment:4 Changed 8 years ago by
- Reviewers set to Marco Streng
- Status changed from needs_review to needs_work
comment:5 Changed 8 years ago by
Created ticket #12209 for number 3.
It is called reduce_poly as there is already a general scheme method called reduce which
"Return the corresponding reduced algebraic space associated to this scheme."
Changed 8 years ago by
comment:7 Changed 6 years ago by
- Cc mstreng removed
- Dependencies changed from #6341 to #6341, #14755, #14756
- Keywords sd51 added
Changed 6 years ago by
comment:8 Changed 6 years ago by
- Description modified (diff)
- Work issues set to need to recheck once dependencies are finalised
comment:9 Changed 6 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-5.11 to sage-5.12
comment:10 Changed 6 years ago by
- Description modified (diff)
comment:11 Changed 6 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-6.1 to sage-6.2
comment:12 Changed 5 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-6.2 to sage-6.3
comment:13 Changed 5 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-6.3 to sage-6.4
Note: See
TracTickets for help on using
tickets.
I'd say 1. is required for a positive review. 3 may be something for a later ticket if it is too much work.