On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 08:24:28AM -0700, Anne Schilling wrote:
> Yes, I think the alcove path model is less complex to implement;
I had started implementing the Littleman path model in MuPAD. See
crystals::littlemanPath at the end of [1].
I don't remember the status, but the code there is probab
On 6/22/11 8:44 AM, len...@albany.edu wrote:
Yes, I think the alcove path model is less complex to implement;
Brant Jones implemented it for classical types. As far as I remember
a student of Cristian Lenart was thinking of generalizing this to
affine types at the Sage Days in Toronto last year
On 6/22/11 8:21 AM, Daniel Bump wrote:
While checking tracker tickets, it seems that nobody is working on the
littelmann path model for crystals right now... Still someone wrote
this as "todo" in
http://www.sagemath.org/doc/reference/sage/combinat/crystals/highest_weight_crystals.html
Can you
> While checking tracker tickets, it seems that nobody is working on the
> littelmann path model for crystals right now... Still someone wrote
> this as "todo" in
> http://www.sagemath.org/doc/reference/sage/combinat/crystals/highest_weight_crystals.html
>
> Can you provide me with more informat
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 03:17:57PM -0700, Reda CHHAIBI wrote:
> Hi, I am quite new to sage and on the irc channel i was advised to ask
> my question here. Was i wrong on whether starting this as a new
> discussion?
This is definitely the correct place.
> While checking tracker tickets, it seems t
Hi, I am quite new to sage and on the irc channel i was advised to ask
my question here. Was i wrong on whether starting this as a new
discussion?
While checking tracker tickets, it seems that nobody is working on the
littelmann path model for crystals right now... Still someone wrote
this as "tod
