Opened 6 years ago

Closed 6 years ago

#16279 closed enhancement (fixed)

BIBD from Transversal Designs

Reported by: ncohen Owned by:
Priority: major Milestone: sage-6.3
Component: combinatorics Keywords: design, bibd
Cc: vdelecroix, brett, dimpase, knsam Merged in:
Authors: Nathann Cohen Reviewers: Kannappan Sampath
Report Upstream: N/A Work issues:
Branch: 4115b72 (Commits) Commit: 4115b7285b56268418304681ed36d08e58cfd3fe
Dependencies: #16272, #16091 Stopgaps:

Description

This branch implements three constructions of BIBD from transversal designs. Short, efficient, AND useful for the general construction of BIBD with k=5.

As found in http://www.argilo.net/files/bibd.pdf

The constructions are explained in the documentation, too.

Change History (17)

comment:1 Changed 6 years ago by ncohen

  • Branch set to u/ncohen/16279
  • Status changed from new to needs_review

comment:2 Changed 6 years ago by git

  • Commit set to c881070eef242826e8ea0c3b3d60d1c41be61a64

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. Last 10 new commits:

054d2a2trac #16227: Product construction of Transversal Designs
a512ab1trac #16227: Merged with updated #15310
e62fae8corrected doctests + new doctests
4d6e964trac #16227: Replace exception with booleans in the doctests
a46446ftrac #16231: Equivalence between OA/TD/MOLS
a9dce70trac #16231: Merged with updated #16227
8d8b928more documentation to orthogonal_arrays.py
8257178remove MOLS construction for prime powers + doc
d678326trac #16272: Replacing availability by existence and forwarding the results between design constructors
c881070trac #16279: BIBD from Transversal Designs

comment:3 Changed 6 years ago by git

  • Commit changed from c881070eef242826e8ea0c3b3d60d1c41be61a64 to 569c4858a95177d1075c756375c28d676f380586

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. New commits:

569c485trac #16279: BIBD from Transversal Designs

comment:4 Changed 6 years ago by git

  • Commit changed from 569c4858a95177d1075c756375c28d676f380586 to 60e8d35dbd2d0972fab0e306fcecac7e1225dc41

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. Last 10 new commits:

0812a73trac #16281: Simplification
61dc86b16281: long comment for the construction of the projective plane
51daa7ftrac #16281: correct a doctest
e090f92trac #16272: merge #16281
9a221betrac #16272: fix doctests
5074eeetrac #16272: finer doctest to test the output of transversal_design
d81f265trac #16272: ultimate doctest
47798d2trac #16272: simplifying the structure of orthogonal_array
d34b012trac #16272: Merged with updated #16227
60e8d35trac #16279: Merged with updated #16272

comment:5 Changed 6 years ago by ncohen

  • Cc knsam added

Still updating..

Nathann

comment:6 Changed 6 years ago by vdelecroix

  • Keywords design bibd added

adding keyword...

comment:7 Changed 6 years ago by vbraun_spam

  • Milestone changed from sage-6.2 to sage-6.3

comment:8 Changed 6 years ago by knsam

Hi Nathann,

I would like to review this patch and I have the following remarks about your patch:

  • The doc does not build and I have no idea how to fix these errors!
  • Linguistic: A BIBD is a pair (X, B) where X is the set of points and B is the set of blocks. But, the description of the new BIBD as well as how the given BIBD is used in the construction does not make things clear: you say replace sth by a BIBD: what does this mean?

In view of these remarks, I am setting this to needs_work ;-).

[If not for the fact that does not build, I would have went ahead and made the other changes...]

-- Kannappan.

comment:9 Changed 6 years ago by knsam

  • Status changed from needs_review to needs_work

comment:10 Changed 6 years ago by ncohen

That was because `(v,k,1)`-BIBD is okay for Sphinx, but `(v,k,1)-`BIBD is not. Which he clearly reported by saying "Something is wrong". I hate this thing.

Anyway, fixed.

I also avoided the word "replaced" using the same phrasing as in the two other constructions. I also replaced two occurrences of BIBD by BIBDs to make it clearer that we were talking of several BIBD.

I also merged #16091 in, as it is a dependency of this patch.

Nathann

comment:11 Changed 6 years ago by ncohen

  • Status changed from needs_work to needs_review

comment:12 Changed 6 years ago by git

  • Commit changed from 60e8d35dbd2d0972fab0e306fcecac7e1225dc41 to e941a54dc3e757b359a54a9fd8f0f49358fad020

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

927d325trac #16279: Merged with 6.2
e1b29bftrac #16279: Fixing the doc
e722cb1trac #16091: A missing obvious case for BIBD
e941a54trac #16279: Merged with updated #16091

comment:13 Changed 6 years ago by knsam

Hi!

  • My doc building stops at:
[tensor   ] build succeeded.

I have seen that there is a discussion on sage-devel. So, I will see what I can do to fix it. I will have this patch reviewed by evening tommorrow (for me!). Sorry for the delay, Nathann.

-- Kannappan.


New commits:

927d325trac #16279: Merged with 6.2
e1b29bftrac #16279: Fixing the doc
e722cb1trac #16091: A missing obvious case for BIBD
e941a54trac #16279: Merged with updated #16091

comment:14 Changed 6 years ago by git

  • Commit changed from e941a54dc3e757b359a54a9fd8f0f49358fad020 to 4115b7285b56268418304681ed36d08e58cfd3fe

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

c127a6dtrac #16272: Merged with updated #16231
e2749b3trac #16272: Merged with 6.3.beta0
4115b72trac #16279: Merged with updated #16272

comment:15 follow-up: Changed 6 years ago by knsam

  • Reviewers set to Kannappan Sampath

Hi Nathann,

I just have one query: given that the method is called BIBD_From_TD, I was expecting the function to return a block design, but it returns a list instead. I also noted that this method is used in the BalancedIncompleteBlockDesign to construct a block design when existence = True. So, this is probably the desiderata, but I thought that this is worth pointing out...

You may set this to positive review if you would like to return a list instead of a BlockDesign...

This ticket reviewed using SMC!! :-)

--Kannappan.

Last edited 6 years ago by knsam (previous) (diff)

comment:16 in reply to: ↑ 15 Changed 6 years ago by ncohen

  • Status changed from needs_review to positive_review

Helloooooooo !!!

I just have one query: given that the method is called BIBD_From_TD, I was expecting the function to return a block design, but it returns a list instead.

Hmmmm... Well, admittedly I do not like to wrap a list in a class if I don't need to (because doing so may cost non-trivial computations), but in this case the function is really only made to be called by the "main" method, i.e. the constructor of BIBD. It can be called recursively, and it would be nice if we don't convert all the stuff into a Block Design during those calls as we have no reason to ^^;

You may set this to positive review if you would like to return a list instead of a BlockDesign...

Thank you very much ! Now we are only one ticket away from having ALL bibd with k=5, and I have another code ready on my computer : Wilson's construction of MOLS with two truncated groups, which should make a big difference in our table of MOLS. But that's for a bit later, for many patches are still waiting to be merged and this is already sufficiently complicated as it is. Pretty soon, I hope !!!

Nathann

comment:17 Changed 6 years ago by vbraun

  • Branch changed from u/ncohen/16279 to 4115b7285b56268418304681ed36d08e58cfd3fe
  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Status changed from positive_review to closed
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.