Opened 7 years ago
Closed 7 years ago
#16211 closed enhancement (fixed)
Implement Hadamard 3Designs
Reported by:  knsam  Owned by:  

Priority:  minor  Milestone:  sage6.3 
Component:  combinatorics  Keywords:  
Cc:  ncohen  Merged in:  
Authors:  Kannappan Sampath  Reviewers:  Nathann Cohen 
Report Upstream:  N/A  Work issues:  
Branch:  efcee00 (Commits)  Commit:  efcee001368f7964fbbaf944da6e9445f11f2d14 
Dependencies:  #16237  Stopgaps: 
Description
At the moment in sage6.2.beta7, in designs.HadamardDesign?, we have implemented the Hadamard 2design with paramters 2(4n1, 2n1, n1) one gets from a Hadamard matrix of order 4n.
But, of course, this design extends uniquely to a (necessarily) 2(4n, 2n, n1) design: the blocks of this design are blocks of the old design union a new point infinity and complements (in the old point set) of the blocks of old design. And, any contraction is isomorphic to a Hadamard 2design we started off with. So, unsurprisingly, this family is called Hadamard 3designs.
We could very easily implement these too.
Change History (12)
comment:1 Changed 7 years ago by
 Dependencies set to #16237
comment:2 Changed 7 years ago by
 Branch set to u/knsam/16211
 Commit set to bfb6add15dcd7c875b10f047921994d5e3c2bc5b
 Status changed from new to needs_review
comment:3 Changed 7 years ago by
 Commit changed from bfb6add15dcd7c875b10f047921994d5e3c2bc5b to 417b95994e01af32167c8dff5488b6f8d6a1c84a
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. New commits:
417b959  trac #16211: Implement Hadamard Three Designs.

comment:4 followup: ↓ 6 Changed 7 years ago by
 Reviewers set to Nathann Cohen
Hello !
Thank you for this ticket. Nothing wrong in the maths now that 4
is excluded, so only administrative remarks
1) Better to keep the first line of the docstring short and informative. And at most one line
2) There should be an INPUT section, even though most of the functions of this file are a bit old and don't respect that
3) You can link toward the doc of other functions, so unless you wanted to advertise the designs.<tab>
thing it is better to use :meth:
or :func:
instead of just giving the function's name. This appears as a link in the final html doc
sage docbuild reference/combinat html
4) Link toward a reference entry : you needs a _ after the [ref].
5) The reference entry was badly formatted
6) I did not understand the use of .parent()
in this context. I removed it, and no problem. Integers are not so tricky that you need parents to handle them
All this has been implemented in a public/16211. As usual, positive review to your branch. If you agree with my changes (and change the branch's name or add my commits to your branch) then you can set the ticket to positive_review
.
Nathann
comment:5 Changed 7 years ago by
 Commit changed from 417b95994e01af32167c8dff5488b6f8d6a1c84a to 306b8af8bd0fc0f1a077238a9d6a10a1d8b08979
comment:6 in reply to: ↑ 4 Changed 7 years ago by
Replying to ncohen:
Hello !
Thank you for this ticket. Nothing wrong in the maths now that
4
is excluded, so only administrative remarks1) Better to keep the first line of the docstring short and informative. And at most one line
Will do from the next time!
2) There should be an INPUT section, even though most of the functions of this file are a bit old and don't respect that
I am planning on touching this file again, with more designs, so I will take this up that time... For example, circle geometries, inversive planes, translation planes are coming up next!
3) You can link toward the doc of other functions, so unless you wanted to advertise the
designs.<tab>
thing it is better to use:meth:
or:func:
instead of just giving the function's name. This appears as a link in the final html docsage docbuild reference/combinat html
4) Link toward a reference entry : you needs a _ after the [ref].
5) The reference entry was badly formatted
Thank you for fixing these!
6) I did not understand the use of
.parent()
in this context. I removed it, and no problem. Integers are not so tricky that you need parents to handle them
OK! I was just emulating the construction of Hadamard 2design code!
All this has been implemented in a public/16211. As usual, positive review to your branch. If you agree with my changes (and change the branch's name or add my commits to your branch) then you can set the ticket to
positive_review
.
Thank you for the review, Nathann! Your changes are merged and have been pushed!
Kannappan.
comment:7 Changed 7 years ago by
 Status changed from needs_review to positive_review
comment:8 Changed 7 years ago by
 Milestone changed from sage6.2 to sage6.3
comment:9 Changed 7 years ago by
 Status changed from positive_review to needs_work
Documentation doesn't build
comment:10 Changed 7 years ago by
 Commit changed from 306b8af8bd0fc0f1a077238a9d6a10a1d8b08979 to efcee001368f7964fbbaf944da6e9445f11f2d14
comment:11 Changed 7 years ago by
 Status changed from needs_work to positive_review
I guess the failing doc build has been fixed, thanks to Nathann's efforts to fix it! There was one more complaint and I fixed that one! This one now looks good to me!
Kannappan.
comment:12 Changed 7 years ago by
 Branch changed from u/knsam/16211 to efcee001368f7964fbbaf944da6e9445f11f2d14
 Resolution set to fixed
 Status changed from positive_review to closed
New commits:
trac #16237: Indexing in IncidenceStructureFromMatrix method fixed. minor cleanup of Hadamard matrices; they are now normalised.
trac #16211: Implement Hadamard Three Designs.