Opened 2 years ago

Closed 2 years ago

#29887 closed defect (fixed)

Fix inconsistency in combinatorial designs

Reported by: gh-Ivo-Maffei Owned by:
Priority: major Milestone: sage-9.2
Component: combinatorial designs Keywords: bibd
Cc: Merged in:
Authors: Ivo Maffei Reviewers: Dima Pasechnik
Report Upstream: N/A Work issues:
Branch: 44276ea (Commits, GitHub, GitLab) Commit: 44276ea43e8465428fc9d50541a2bcb8c9bfd807
Dependencies: Stopgaps:

Status badges

Description (last modified by slelievre)

In the BIBD_constructions dictionary, values are lists of blocks except one which is a design object.

We fix this inconsistency as we plan for the function that constructs BIBDs to be extended to lambda other than 1.

Change History (7)

comment:1 follow-up: Changed 2 years ago by slelievre

Could something like:

sage: from sage.combinat.designs.bibd import balanced_incomplete_block_design
sage: balanced_incomplete_block_design(176, 50, 14)
True

be added as a doctest?

Set the ticket to needs_review when ready for review.

Use full name in "Authors" field rather than trac username.

comment:2 Changed 2 years ago by gh-Ivo-Maffei

  • Authors changed from gh-Ivo-Maffei to Ivo Maffei
  • Status changed from new to needs_review

comment:3 in reply to: ↑ 1 Changed 2 years ago by gh-Ivo-Maffei

Replying to slelievre:

Could something like:

sage: from sage.combinat.designs.bibd import balanced_incomplete_block_design
sage: balanced_incomplete_block_design(176, 50, 14)
True

be added as a doctest?

At the moment the balanced_incomplete_block_design function only takes 2 parameters (v and k). I was planning to make another ticket where that function gets expanded to allow arbitrary values for lambda. Do you think I should add everything here?

comment:4 Changed 2 years ago by slelievre

  • Description modified (diff)
  • Summary changed from Fixed inconsistency in code that caused a bug to Fix inconsistency in combinatorial designs

At the moment the balanced_incomplete_block_design function only takes 2 parameters (v and k). I was planning to make another ticket where that function gets expanded to allow arbitrary values for lambda. Do you think I should add everything here?

It's fine either way. Keep the doctest for the other ticket if you do two.

comment:5 Changed 2 years ago by slelievre

Maybe illustrate the improved consistency in the ticket description here?

comment:6 Changed 2 years ago by dimpase

  • Reviewers set to Dima Pasechnik
  • Status changed from needs_review to positive_review

looks good to me

comment:7 Changed 2 years ago by vbraun

  • Branch changed from u/gh-Ivo-Maffei/bidb_bug to 44276ea43e8465428fc9d50541a2bcb8c9bfd807
  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Status changed from positive_review to closed
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.