Yo !
> Can you formalise what you look for?
It is very kind of you to help me in my research, but it is a bit unrelated
to this discussion :-P
> Perhaps this can be sped up, e.g. by doing
> some ILP or something like this?
I tried, but my function 'f' is not of the good kind for a LP formulation.
It is too slow.
> You can also think of your "NO sets" as a set of SAT clauses of the form
> !x_{i_1} || !x_{i_2} || ... || !x_{i_m},
> and all of them should hold true.
Indeed, but in order to do that I would need to enumerate them all. And
this is precisely what this code above does (and even it is too slow).
> So you want to find all "maximal length" solutions to this SAT problem.
I don't know what you understand by 'maximal length'. I am somehow
interested by the maximal sets such that f(S) is true, but not even all of
them. Well, it's a bit complicated to explain.
> Perhaps some SAT solvers can do this, I don't know
They would still need all minimal no-sets, and I can't list them at the
moment, they are too many. And if I coud list them I would not need the SAT
solver anyway for I would be able to enumerate the maximal yes-sets too.
> (by the way, SAT solvers is an area where people do care a lot about
actual fast
> implementations)
Indeed, and I would not try to rewrite one from scratch.
Nathann
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
