Dear Sage Support group,

I've been trying some simple operations with ideals in polynomial
rings with ZZ coefficients in Sage 4.1, and I have been puzzled by
some of the results:

1. If I define a polynomial ring and ideal using, say

sage: R.<x> = PolynomialRing(ZZ)
sage: J = R.ideal(x^2 - 3, 25 + 6*x, 20 + 7*x)

, then J does not have access to the methods available for ideals in
multivariable polynomial rings such as groebner_basis. Is this to be
expected? Is there a clean way to get access to the other methods? The
methods that are available for ideals such as J seem either not to be
implemented (e.g. is_prime) or not to work properly. Consider, for
example,

sage: R.ideal(x^2 - 5, 2) == R.ideal(x^2 - 3, 2)
False

2. If I do add an extra variable to get access to the multivariable-
polynomial-ring methods, then I can get a Groebner basis, but it does
not look completely standardized. Consider, for example,

sage: S.<x,y> = PolynomialRing(ZZ)
sage: L = S.ideal(x^2 - 3, 10 + 2*x, 11)
sage: L.groebner_basis()
[x - 50, 11]

. I might have expected to get [x+5, 11], which looks more reduced to
me (and matches the behavior of groebner_basis() for ideals in
polynomial rings over QQ). This behavior is presumably something
inherited from Singular, but I couldn't find the explanation its
conventions for standard bases over ZZ in the Singular documentation.

3. Perhaps as a consequence of the not-completely-standardized
Groebner bases, I get some strange answers as in (1.), even when I
work in S:

sage: M == S.ideal(x - 50, 11)
True
sage: M == S.ideal(x + 5, 11)
False

. On the other hand, we do have

sage: x+5 in M
True

. (The analogous method in R is not implemented.)


Regards,

James Parson
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
sage-support-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to