Opened 10 years ago
Closed 10 years ago
#12667 closed defect (fixed)
category root lattice realization issue: infinite loop while trying to reflect to the positive chamber
Reported by: | mshimo | Owned by: | sage-combinat |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | sage-5.0 |
Component: | combinatorics | Keywords: | root system |
Cc: | sage-combinat | Merged in: | sage-5.0.beta11 |
Authors: | Mark Shimozono | Reviewers: | Anne Schilling |
Report Upstream: | N/A | Work issues: | |
Branch: | Commit: | ||
Dependencies: | #6588 | Stopgaps: |
Description (last modified by )
version 5.0 beta7
sage/combinat/root_system/root_lattice_realizations.py element methods to_positive_chamber, reduced_word may give infinite loops for affine root systems
R=sage.combinat.root_system.all.RootSystem(['A',1,1]) rl = R.root_lattice() mu = rl.from_vector(vector([0,1])) mu.to_positive_chamber()
For elements of a root lattice realization:
- Added method reflect which reflects across a hyperplane orthogonal
to a (co)root.
- Renamed to_positive_chamber to to_dominant_chamber, and added case checking
for affine root systems which prevents infinite looping. Root systems that are not finite and not affine are not checked.
- Added method weyl_action which acts on a vector by a Weyl group element.
- Added method weyl_stabilizer which returns indices of simple reflections
fixing a weight.
Attachments (1)
Change History (14)
comment:1 Changed 10 years ago by
- Description modified (diff)
comment:2 Changed 10 years ago by
- Description modified (diff)
comment:3 Changed 10 years ago by
- Description modified (diff)
comment:4 Changed 10 years ago by
comment:5 follow-up: ↓ 6 Changed 10 years ago by
- Cc sage-combinat added
- Reviewers set to Anne Schilling
comment:6 in reply to: ↑ 5 ; follow-up: ↓ 7 Changed 10 years ago by
Hi Mark,
Here are some comments. First of all, I moved your patch up in the queue since presumably you want it to go into Sage soon. Then I can do the testing on the sage-combinat queue.
- Please use "hg qrefresh -e" and add a description of the changes you made. This should
appear at the beginning of the file. The same description can then be used on the trac server once you upload it there.
- Nicolas once told me that every method should have a one-line short description. Then a more detailed description can follow. So for example in your new method "def reflection" have one line with a description
Also, for consistency in
"Reflect
self
across the hyperplane orthogonal to
root
."
should it be "Reflects ...."?
- Please use the syntax
- .. warning
for the warning.
Also, there are doctest failures
sage -t "devel/sage-combinat/sage/combinat/root_system/root_lattice_realizations.py" File "/Applications/sage-5.0.beta7/devel/sage-combinat/sage/combinat/root_system/root_lattice_realizations.py", line 522:
sage: Phi.cover_relations()
Exception raised:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/Applications/sage-5.0.beta7/local/bin/ncadoctest.py", line 1231, in run_one_test
self.run_one_example(test, example, filename, compileflags)
File "/Applications/sage-5.0.beta7/local/bin/sagedoctest.py", line 38, in run_one_example
OrigDocTestRunner?.run_one_example(self, test, example, filename, compileflags)
File "/Applications/sage-5.0.beta7/local/bin/ncadoctest.py", line 1172, in run_one_example
compileflags, 1) in test.globs
File "<doctest main.example_16[3]>", line 1, in <module>
Phi.cover_relations()###line 522:
sage: Phi.cover_relations()
File "/Applications/sage-5.0.beta7/local/lib/python/site-packages/sage/combinat/posets/posets.py", line 1198, in cover_relations
return [c for c in self.cover_relations_iterator()]
File "/Applications/sage-5.0.beta7/local/lib/python/site-packages/sage/combinat/posets/posets.py", line 1213, in cover_relations_iterator
yield map(self._vertex_to_element,(u,v))
File "/Applications/sage-5.0.beta7/local/lib/python/site-packages/sage/combinat/posets/posets.py", line 698, in _vertex_to_element
return self._list[vertex]
TypeError?: tuple indices must be integers, not RootSpace_with_category.element_class
File "/Applications/sage-5.0.beta7/devel/sage-combinat/sage/combinat/root_system/root_lattice_realizations.py", line 527:
sage: Phi.cover_relations()
Exception raised:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/Applications/sage-5.0.beta7/local/bin/ncadoctest.py", line 1231, in run_one_test
self.run_one_example(test, example, filename, compileflags)
File "/Applications/sage-5.0.beta7/local/bin/sagedoctest.py", line 38, in run_one_example
OrigDocTestRunner?.run_one_example(self, test, example, filename, compileflags)
File "/Applications/sage-5.0.beta7/local/bin/ncadoctest.py", line 1172, in run_one_example
compileflags, 1) in test.globs
File "<doctest main.example_16[5]>", line 1, in <module>
Phi.cover_relations()###line 527:
sage: Phi.cover_relations()
File "/Applications/sage-5.0.beta7/local/lib/python/site-packages/sage/combinat/posets/posets.py", line 1198, in cover_relations
return [c for c in self.cover_relations_iterator()]
File "/Applications/sage-5.0.beta7/local/lib/python/site-packages/sage/combinat/posets/posets.py", line 1213, in cover_relations_iterator
yield map(self._vertex_to_element,(u,v))
File "/Applications/sage-5.0.beta7/local/lib/python/site-packages/sage/combinat/posets/posets.py", line 698, in _vertex_to_element
return self._list[vertex]
TypeError?: tuple indices must be integers, not RootSpace_with_category.element_class
File "/Applications/sage-5.0.beta7/devel/sage-combinat/sage/combinat/root_system/root_lattice_realizations.py", line 532:
sage: Phi.cover_relations()
Exception raised:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/Applications/sage-5.0.beta7/local/bin/ncadoctest.py", line 1231, in run_one_test
self.run_one_example(test, example, filename, compileflags)
File "/Applications/sage-5.0.beta7/local/bin/sagedoctest.py", line 38, in run_one_example
OrigDocTestRunner?.run_one_example(self, test, example, filename, compileflags)
File "/Applications/sage-5.0.beta7/local/bin/ncadoctest.py", line 1172, in run_one_example
compileflags, 1) in test.globs
File "<doctest main.example_16[7]>", line 1, in <module>
Phi.cover_relations()###line 532:
sage: Phi.cover_relations()
File "/Applications/sage-5.0.beta7/local/lib/python/site-packages/sage/combinat/posets/posets.py", line 1198, in cover_relations
return [c for c in self.cover_relations_iterator()]
File "/Applications/sage-5.0.beta7/local/lib/python/site-packages/sage/combinat/posets/posets.py", line 1213, in cover_relations_iterator
yield map(self._vertex_to_element,(u,v))
File "/Applications/sage-5.0.beta7/local/lib/python/site-packages/sage/combinat/posets/posets.py", line 698, in _vertex_to_element
return self._list[vertex]
TypeError?: tuple indices must be integers, not RootSpace_with_category.element_class
1 items had failures:
3 of 9 in main.example_16
*Test Failed* 3 failures. For whitespace errors, see the file /Users/anne/.sagetmp/root_lattice_realizations_29723.py
[5.0 s]
The following tests failed:
sage -t "devel/sage-combinat/sage/combinat/root_system/root_lattice_realizations.py"
Total time for all tests: 5.0 seconds
Though these doctest failures also seem to appear without your patch applied.
Best,
Anne
comment:7 in reply to: ↑ 6 ; follow-up: ↓ 8 Changed 10 years ago by
Ok, I found the patch that broke the above doctests and moved your patch up. The doctests look good now.
Anne
comment:8 in reply to: ↑ 7 Changed 10 years ago by
- Dependencies set to #6588
Hi Mark,
I posted a quick reviewer's patch on sage-combinat. If you are satisfied, please fold it into yours and post the result on trac (details in a private e-mail).
Thanks,
Anne
comment:9 follow-up: ↓ 10 Changed 10 years ago by
- Description modified (diff)
Changed 10 years ago by
comment:10 in reply to: ↑ 9 Changed 10 years ago by
- Description modified (diff)
- Status changed from new to needs_review
I checked the new version of the patch and everything looks good. Positive review.
Anne
comment:11 Changed 10 years ago by
- Status changed from needs_review to positive_review
comment:12 Changed 10 years ago by
- Description modified (diff)
comment:13 Changed 10 years ago by
- Merged in set to sage-5.0.beta11
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from positive_review to closed
Sorry for my delayed answer. In the affine case, please add a test on level; something like:
For the general Kac-Moody case: I think we can assume that a user playing with those has some non trivial background. In that case, and unless there is a cheap and easy to implement test as in the affine case, it would be perfectly fine to write in the documentation something like:
Otherwise put: as long as it is well documented, it is preferable for power users to have a feature that needs to be used with care, than no feature. Sage should be usable as a race car for those who wants one.
Cheers,