Opened 5 years ago

Closed 5 years ago

#17612 closed enhancement (fixed)

A GroupDivisibleDesign module with a couple of constructions

Reported by: ncohen Owned by:
Priority: major Milestone: sage-6.5
Component: combinatorial designs Keywords:
Cc: vdelecroix, dimpase Merged in:
Authors: Nathann Cohen Reviewers: Vincent Delecroix
Report Upstream: N/A Work issues:
Branch: 2401c40 (Commits) Commit: 2401c406c149e45e6b9700c6d69fe9abf710fc22
Dependencies: Stopgaps:

Description

This is another element of the future construction of Kirkman Triple Systems. It creates a new group_divisible_designs module with two constructions (one of which just creates a BIBD). One of its commits moves the GroupDivisibleDesign class from incidence_structures to the new file (that commit is a move, it does nothing else).

This branch probably conflicts with #17581. When one of them will be reviewed I will rebase the other)

Nathann

Change History (11)

comment:1 Changed 5 years ago by ncohen

  • Branch set to public/17612
  • Status changed from new to needs_review

comment:2 Changed 5 years ago by git

  • Commit set to 51c2835ae96b469ee21f69ae6d22e30d89056438

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

157043aA new combinat/designs/group_divisible_design.py file
8659d03Move GroupDivisibleDesign to a new file (nothing else is changed)
51c2835fix the import statements

comment:3 Changed 5 years ago by git

  • Commit changed from 51c2835ae96b469ee21f69ae6d22e30d89056438 to 429a1becc485e8705ce60cb1e079ee9ecee6ba55

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

1235badtrac #17581: Resolvable BIBD
6ec96bftrac #17581: doc + simplification
de3fd60trac #17581: Merged with 6.5.beta5
c0df139trac #17612: A new combinat/designs/group_divisible_design.py file
9d3b32btrac #17612: Move GroupDivisibleDesign to a new file (nothing else is changed)
429a1betrac #17612: fix the import statements

comment:4 Changed 5 years ago by git

  • Commit changed from 429a1becc485e8705ce60cb1e079ee9ecee6ba55 to 00a150ed2a9afbb120d7fd4dde7b3f669828eabc

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

2ccc198trac #17581: Merged with 6.5.beta5
3e25827trac #17581: Bugfix
6d284bdtrac #17612: A new combinat/designs/group_divisible_design.py file
73b721dtrac #17612: Move GroupDivisibleDesign to a new file (nothing else is changed)
00a150etrac #17612: fix the import statements

comment:5 follow-up: Changed 5 years ago by vdelecroix

Hey,

1) A small commit for typos in the doc.

2) GDD(kn,{k},{n}) = TD(k,n), doesn't it? But transversal_design is not called in group_divisible_design. Is there a reason?

Vincent

comment:6 Changed 5 years ago by vdelecroix

  • Status changed from needs_review to needs_info

comment:7 Changed 5 years ago by git

  • Commit changed from 00a150ed2a9afbb120d7fd4dde7b3f669828eabc to 2401c406c149e45e6b9700c6d69fe9abf710fc22

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

2401c40trac #17612: documentation

comment:8 in reply to: ↑ 5 ; follow-up: Changed 5 years ago by ncohen

1) A small commit for typos in the doc.

What's wrong with k_k, really ? :-PPPP

2) GDD(kn,{k},{n}) = TD(k,n), doesn't it? But transversal_design is not called in group_divisible_design. Is there a reason?

Oh, true. Well, I did not need it here. But of course we can add it. Actually, it probably does not make much sense to have GDD ask the BIBD constructor, as those BIBD also yield OA. And I don't think that there is any OA that is built through a BIBD.

It's up to you, we can do it now or later. I don't mind either, it all works.

The reason why I wrote the GDD constructor like that is that I need those constructions for the KTS.

Actually, I'm more for getting this inside first, this way I can write the end of the KTS code tomorrow. And perhaps another code afterward to change that. Then again it is all correct.

Nathann

P.S.: We do what you prefer, set it to positive review depending on that, your commit is fine.

comment:9 in reply to: ↑ 8 ; follow-up: Changed 5 years ago by vdelecroix

  • Reviewers set to Vincent Delecroix
  • Status changed from needs_info to positive_review

Replying to ncohen:

1) A small commit for typos in the doc.

What's wrong with k_k, really ? :-PPPP

2) GDD(kn,{k},{n}) = TD(k,n), doesn't it? But transversal_design is not called in group_divisible_design. Is there a reason?

Oh, true. Well, I did not need it here. But of course we can add it. Actually, it probably does not make much sense to have GDD ask the BIBD constructor, as those BIBD also yield OA. And I don't think that there is any OA that is built through a BIBD.

Indirectly, yes. They use projective planes.

It's up to you, we can do it now or later. I don't mind either, it all works.

The reason why I wrote the GDD constructor like that is that I need those constructions for the KTS.

Actually, I'm more for getting this inside first, this way I can write the end of the KTS code tomorrow. And perhaps another code afterward to change that. Then again it is all correct.

Fine, everything depends whether or not you want to expose this function in designs.<TAB>. If you do, then one needs to make the appropriate call to transversal_design.

Vincent

comment:10 in reply to: ↑ 9 Changed 5 years ago by ncohen

Indirectly, yes. They use projective planes.

True, but that's done manually, by testing if n is a prime power and stuff.

Fine, everything depends whether or not you want to expose this function in designs.<TAB>. If you do, then one needs to make the appropriate call to transversal_design.

With this patch it appears in designs.<tab>. Anyway, I'm not saying that I will not do it. I will write the patch tomorrow. I will just end the KTS construction first, that's all.

Nathann

comment:11 Changed 5 years ago by vbraun

  • Branch changed from public/17612 to 2401c406c149e45e6b9700c6d69fe9abf710fc22
  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Status changed from positive_review to closed
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.