On Friday, 19 June 2015 11:35:36 UTC+1, Christian Stump wrote:
the reason must be efficiency. E.g. for permutation groups one would work
with a strong generating set S, rather than the original generators;
expressing an element in terms of S is very quick, and then you hold
expressions
the reason must be efficiency. E.g. for permutation groups one would work
with a strong generating set S, rather than the original generators;
expressing an element in terms of S is very quick, and then you hold
expressions for each element of S in terms of the original generators
GAP4 has 39.5-2 Factorization (
http://www.gap-system.org/Manuals/doc/ref/chap39.html)
calling GAP from Sage is not hard...
Thanks for your reply -- but I am still a little puzzled:
gap has two algorithms to compute a word in generators. This one, and the
one implemented in
On Friday, 19 June 2015 09:02:49 UTC+1, Christian Stump wrote:
GAP4 has 39.5-2 Factorization (
http://www.gap-system.org/Manuals/doc/ref/chap39.html)
calling GAP from Sage is not hard...
Thanks for your reply -- but I am still a little puzzled:
gap has two algorithms to compute a word
GAP4 has 39.5-2 Factorization
(http://www.gap-system.org/Manuals/doc/ref/chap39.html)
calling GAP from Sage is not hard...
On Tuesday, 16 June 2015 17:02:35 UTC+1, Christian Stump wrote:
Hi there,
I wasn't able to find the following functionality: Let W =
PermutationGroup(gens) be a
