On 10/28/14, 15:53, Robert Dodier wrote:
On 2014-10-25, Jason Grout <jason-s...@creativetrax.com> wrote:
http://www.ams.org/notices/201410/rnoti-p1249.pdf
P.S. It would be interesting to see if Sage can do the calculation they
identified as buggy in mathematica. That would make for a cool
follow-up editorial.
I've reimplemnted the buggy determinant calculation in Maxima.
Presumably from this it would be easy to redo it in any other system;
I don't know how Sage manages such calculations.
I am happy to report that Maxima, despite its many and varied bugs,
doesn't have this particular one:
bfloat (determinant (big_matrix));
=> 1.951242191319868b9762
Reported value in paper is 1.95124219131987 * 10^9762.
Script is attached as a PS. The function foo(n) can be used to generate
random examples, as the authors did to find one which tickles the bug.
Thanks so much for typing up those long matrices. It looks like Sage
also gets the right answer for that particular example:
https://cloud.sagemath.com/#projects/49a2531d-9d02-42c9-9db6-f9551fbfa59e/files/2014-10-24-212837.sagews
Thanks,
Jason
--
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.
