On Monday, January 19, 2015 at 9:27:44 PM UTC-8, Ondřej Čertík wrote:
>
>
> and your approach returns a wrong number of terms, so something is
> wrong. But it is quite fast.
>
The term count doesn't tell you that. The representation of sqrt3 and sqrt5
doesn't consist of single term expressions
A perhaps more interesting benchmark : how long does it take to factor it
back?
--
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...@googlegroup
Hi Miguel,
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 4:03 PM, mmarco wrote:
> It is much faster to work with absolute fields instead of towers of
> extensions:
>
> sage: K.=QuadraticField(3)
> sage: F.=K.extension(x^2-5)
> sage: R. = F[]
> sage: %time _=(a1+a2+a3+sqrt5*a4+sqrt3*a5)^25
> CPU times: user 27.4 s, sys
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 2:17 AM, Nicolas M. Thiery
wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 06:11:09PM -0800, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>> :). It might be possible, but it'd be really, really messy (messier
>> than it is in C++, because one needs the shared PyObject_HEAD to be
>> corre
It is much faster to work with absolute fields instead of towers of
extensions:
sage: K.=QuadraticField(3)
sage: F.=K.extension(x^2-5)
sage: R. = F[]
sage: %time _=(a1+a2+a3+sqrt5*a4+sqrt3*a5)^25
CPU times: user 27.4 s, sys: 12 ms, total: 27.4 s
Wall time: 27.5 s
sage: FF.=F.absolute_field()
sage
On 2015-01-19, Nils Bruin wrote:
>> (require `maxima)
> [...]
>> (in-package :maxima)
> MAXIMA> #$2+2$
>
> 4
> MAXIMA> '#$x+5$
>
> (MEVAL* '((MPLUS) $X 5))
> MAXIMA> (meval '((mplus) 2 2))
>
> 4
One more thing that might be relevant in this context. You can call
the DISPLA (note the lack of a t
The computation in pari (directed from Sage):
sage: x=pari("x")
sage: y=pari("y")
sage: sqrt3=pari("Mod")(x, x^2-3)
sage: sqrt5=pari("Mod")(y, y^2-5)
sage: a1=pari("a1")
sage: a2=pari("a2")
sage: a3=pari("a3")
sage: a4=pari("a4")
sage: a5=pari("a5")
sage: time f = (a1+a2+a3+sqrt5*a4+sqrt3*a5)**18
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Nils Bruin wrote:
>> Nils, did you specifically try this **exact input**??
>
>
> Full session:
>
> sage: sage: K. = QuadraticField(3)
> sage: sage: R. = K[]
> sage: sage: timeit("(a1+a2+a3+a4+sqrt3*a5)^25")
> 5 loops, best of 3: 79.9 ms per loop
> sage: sage: time
On Monday, January 19, 2015 at 10:35:42 AM UTC-8, William wrote:
>
>
> Nils, did you specifically try this **exact input**??
>
Full session:
sage: sage: K. = QuadraticField(3)
sage: sage: R. = K[]
sage: sage: timeit("(a1+a2+a3+a4+sqrt3*a5)^25")
5 loops, best of 3: 79.9 ms per loop
sage: sage:
Hi Vincent,
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Vincent Delecroix
<20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello Ondrej,
>
> For such questions of Sage usage, it is better to discuss on
> ask.sagemath.org or sage-support.
>
> You can also deal with all algebraic numbers at once with QQbar
>
> sage: sqrt
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Nils Bruin wrote:
> On Monday, January 19, 2015 at 9:46:47 AM UTC-8, Ralf Stephan wrote:
>>>
>>> What is "here"?
>>
>>
>> AMD Phenom 3GHz, 8GB RAM, no other big jobs
>
>
> On Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600 CPU @ 3.40GHz I'm getting the same times as
> Vincent. That's o
On Monday, January 19, 2015 at 9:46:47 AM UTC-8, Ralf Stephan wrote:
>
> What is "here"?
>>
>
> AMD Phenom 3GHz, 8GB RAM, no other big jobs
>
On Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600 CPU @ 3.40GHz I'm getting the same times as
Vincent. That's on 6.5beta4 or 5.
The difference you're reporting is very larg
Hello Ondrej,
For such questions of Sage usage, it is better to discuss on
ask.sagemath.org or sage-support.
You can also deal with all algebraic numbers at once with QQbar
sage: sqrt3 = QQbar(sqrt(3))
sage: sqrt5 = QQbar(sqrt(5))
But then polynomials over QQbar are much slower.
Vincent
2015-
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Ondřej Čertík wrote:
> Hi Vincent,
>
> On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Vincent Delecroix
> <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> 2015-01-18 18:03 UTC+01:00, Ondřej Čertík :
>>> Can you invent an example, that can't be converted to polynomials?
>>> Perh
Hi Vincent,
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Vincent Delecroix
<20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 2015-01-18 18:03 UTC+01:00, Ondřej Čertík :
>> Can you invent an example, that can't be converted to polynomials?
>> Perhaps (a1+a2+a3+sqrt(5)*a4+sqrt(3)*a5)^25?
>
> Still doable. You need
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Ralf Stephan wrote:
>> What is "here"?
>
>
> AMD Phenom 3GHz, 8GB RAM, no other big jobs
>
>> Since that expression is large, the cache size of the CPU might
>> significantly impact performance.
>
>
> Wouldn't that affect any of the following?
>
> │ Sage Version 6.
>
> What is "here"?
>
AMD Phenom 3GHz, 8GB RAM, no other big jobs
Since that expression is large, the cache size of the CPU might
> significantly impact performance.
Wouldn't that affect any of the following?
│ Sage Version 6.5.beta5, Release Date: 2015-01-05 │
│ Type "n
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Ralf Stephan wrote:
> On Sunday, January 18, 2015 at 9:18:53 AM UTC+1, vdelecroix wrote:
>>
>> Your example can be reduced to polynomials
>>
>> sage: K. = QuadraticField(3)
>> sage: R. = K[]
>> sage: timeit("(a1+a2+a3+a4+sqrt3*a5)^25")
>> 5 loops, best of 3: 81 ms
On Sunday, January 18, 2015 at 9:18:53 AM UTC+1, vdelecroix wrote:
>
> Your example can be reduced to polynomials
>
> sage: K. = QuadraticField(3)
> sage: R. = K[]
> sage: timeit("(a1+a2+a3+a4+sqrt3*a5)^25")
> 5 loops, best of 3: 81 ms per loop
>
How do you get this speed? Here it's three or
On Monday, January 19, 2015 at 8:22:15 AM UTC-8, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
> On 2015-01-19, Julien Puydt > wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I wanted to play with maxima-in-ecl to understand how it works, but
> > failed: from reading sage's sources I thought I was supposed to use a
> > MEVAL function, but
On 2015-01-19, Julien Puydt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I wanted to play with maxima-in-ecl to understand how it works, but
> failed: from reading sage's sources I thought I was supposed to use a
> MEVAL function, but it failed. Here is what I did:
>
> jpuydt@cauchy:~/sage-6.4.1$ ./sage -ecl
> ECL (Embedda
Hi,
I wanted to play with maxima-in-ecl to understand how it works, but
failed: from reading sage's sources I thought I was supposed to use a
MEVAL function, but it failed. Here is what I did:
jpuydt@cauchy:~/sage-6.4.1$ ./sage -ecl
ECL (Embeddable Common-Lisp) 13.5.1 (git:UNKNOWN)
Copyright
I believe dashes can appear in the version number (Singular-x-y-z should
be safe) but not in the package name.
--
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 sag
23 matches
Mail list logo
