>
> it's quite general; e.g. X is precisely the set of losing coalitions
> in a simple game (in cooperative game theory)
>
I read nothing else in this thread, but if so then see
http://www.sagemath.org/doc/reference/game_theory/sage/game_theory/cooperative_game.html
--
You received this me
On 13 September 2014 11:00, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) <
drkir...@kirkbymicrowave.co.uk> wrote:
> 5) I do agree with much of what is written about portability and the
> ***ing GNU compiler. People now write in "GNU C", which is a
> constantly changing like the wind direction.
>
> I my
If you want to see the code, I just finished cleaning it a bit.
http://www.steinertriples.fr/ncohen/tmp/code.py
Nathann
On 14 September 2014 00:10, Nathann Cohen wrote:
> Yoo !
>
> > Sounds like an interesting problem, do you know of an efficient
> algorithm to do this (without simply
>From scratch. Otherwise you’ll probably encounter permission problems down the
>line.
François
On 14/09/2014, at 7:41, s m h wrote:
> Thanks, but now, as an unprivileged user can I continue building from where
> it broke, or I should restart the process from the beginning (using 'make'
> ag
Yoo !
> Sounds like an interesting problem, do you know of an efficient algorithm
to do this (without simply trying all sets of course)? Have you looked in
the literature?
I don't believe in "literature" anymore. I don't know a lot about other
fields of research, but in graph theory peopl
Thanks, but now, as an unprivileged user can I continue building from where
it broke, or I should restart the process from the beginning (using 'make'
again)?
در شنبه 13 سپتامبر 2014، ساعت 20:43:25 (UTC+4:30)، s m h نوشته:
>
>
>#In The Name of God#
> Hi, I have this error while buildig Sage
Thank for your answer. Now as an unprivileged user should I restart all
building process again or continue from breaking point? However, I have no
idea how to continue the process at all!
در شنبه 13 سپتامبر 2014، ساعت 21:38:21 (UTC+4:30)، Christian Nassau نوشته:
>
> I think you're seeing the sa
On Saturday, September 13, 2014 9:26:33 PM UTC+1, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
> (of course it's out of the question to compute the eigenvalues of an
> arbitrary 0-1
> sparse matrix of that kind of size, so one really has to go for the
> largest one)
Depends of course on how many ones there are ;-
On 2014-09-13, William A Stein wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 11:52 AM, William A Stein wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Erik Slivken
>> <> wrote:
>>> William-
>>>
>>> I am trying to find the eigenvalues of a roughly 1x1 sparse matrix
>>> with entries from {0,1} (and would li
On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 11:52 AM, William A Stein wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Erik Slivken
> <> wrote:
>> William-
>>
>> I am trying to find the eigenvalues of a roughly 1x1 sparse matrix
>> with entries from {0,1} (and would like to do this for even larger
>> matrices). I
On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Erik Slivken
<> wrote:
> William-
>
> I am trying to find the eigenvalues of a roughly 1x1 sparse matrix
> with entries from {0,1} (and would like to do this for even larger
> matrices). I don't know what could be done to increase the speed (right now
> it
I think you're seeing the same problem as described here:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/sage-support/H-SI3700rGc
Building Sage as root seems to be currently unsupported; I'd try to
build from a regular user account instead.
HTH,
Christian
On 09/13/2014 06:05 PM, s m h wrote:
#In
Don't build Sage as root. Build it as an unprivileged user.
On Saturday, September 13, 2014 5:13:25 PM UTC+1, s m h wrote:
>
>
>#In The Name of God#
> Hi, I have this error while buildig Sage 6.3 Source file
> (sage-6.3.tar.gz). After I have extracted it (using tar -xvf) and after I
> star
On 12 September 2014 20:12, rjf wrote:
> Maybe I'm missing the kernel of your annoyance. I was struck by the
> fact that Beebe says nice things about Common Lisp, and maybe that
> was your annoyance -- after all, python version n+1 might be incompatible
> with version n; and maybe there is but one
#In The Name of God#
Hi, I have this error while buildig Sage 6.3 Source file (sage-6.3.tar.gz).
After I have extracted it (using tar -xvf) and after I started building
sage using 'make', after about 2 hours of building process, the following
is shown:
===
#In The Name of God#
Hi, I have this error while buildig Sage 6.3 Source file (sage-6.3.tar.gz).
After I have extracted it (using tar -xvf) and after I started building
sage using 'make', after about 2 hours of building process, the following
is shown:
==
RHEL4 also came out in Feb 2005 and is supported until 2017, so if you
can't build Sage version X then you are probably not trying hard enough ;-)
On Saturday, September 13, 2014 4:59:51 PM UTC+1, wstein wrote:
>
> Does anybody know of any concrete examples of "reproducible research
> failures
Does anybody know of any concrete examples of "reproducible research
failures" involving sage, in the spirit of the article? I.e. actual
(published?) research math code done in sage version X that can't be run
today (in particular either the api of sage changed a lot *or* nobody can
build sage vers
# In The Name of God #
To whom it may concern:
I downloaded Sage source file (Sage-6.3.tar.gz) and started installing it
after extracting (tar -xvf sage-6.3.tar.gz). After about 2 hours of
installation progress this error has shown:
##
On 2014-09-13, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2014-09-13 11:35, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>> Hello everybody !
>>
>> I just wrote a function I need for myself, and I wonder where I should
>> put it in Sage. Here is the thing:
>>
>> I have a boolean function F defined on all subsets of a set X. The
>> funct
>
> 7) The application of software engineering is I feel an important
> thing. I have tried to argue this before, with very little success,
> suggesting William buy books on the topic for serious developers. I
> note that this paper makes the same comments.
>
>
I think that many Sage developer
On 2014-09-13 11:35, Nathann Cohen wrote:
Hello everybody !
I just wrote a function I need for myself, and I wonder where I should
put it in Sage. Here is the thing:
I have a boolean function F defined on all subsets of a set X. The
function is increasing, i.e. F(X)=1 => F(X')=1 for all subsets
Hello everybody !
I just wrote a function I need for myself, and I wonder where I should put
it in Sage. Here is the thing:
I have a boolean function F defined on all subsets of a set X. The function
is increasing, i.e. F(X)=1 => F(X')=1 for all subsets X' of X.
Now I want to compute the hypergr
On 12 September 2014 02:23, William A Stein wrote:
> Hi Sage Devs,
>
> I just received this email which links to a report about "global
> digital math libraries" and also a long and opinionated document by
> somebody named Nelson Beebe. Since Sage is mentioned a few times in
> both documents, I t
This blog post seems somewhat relevant to sage development. I don't agree
with the author's main claim (I like how numpy is developed), but the post
still raises interesting issues that are important to consider. In
particular, that the sage source tarballs provide a way to build self
contained
25 matches
Mail list logo
