On 2014-03-04, Tom Boothby tomas.boot...@gmail.com wrote:
They do implement the same basic algorithm. However, Robert worked
from McKay's paper describing the algorithm, which was approximately
state-of-the-art when he wrote the paper (but of course, the community
tends to eschew
On 2014-03-03, Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote:
AFAIK both implement the same basic algorithm. My guess is that nauty
quickly realizes that it has a huge problem and starts constructing graph
invariants in an attempt to answer it to the negative. If you were to
compare two graphs
They do implement the same basic algorithm. However, Robert worked
from McKay's paper describing the algorithm, which was approximately
state-of-the-art when he wrote the paper (but of course, the community
tends to eschew optimizations as superfluous to the math, so...).
Also, nauty has some
I would not be surprised it it was the finite field arithmetic that is
causing the difference.
On Friday, February 28, 2014 4:18:44 PM UTC-5, Aleksandr Kodess wrote:
As far as I know both sage and magma utilize Brendan McKay's program nauty
in order to check whether two given graphs
Once the graph is constructed, is_isomorphic throws away the vertex
labels and just works with pointers to ints. Constructing the graph
itself happens in a blink. Sadly, the bulk of the time is spent in
is_isomorphic.
The answer to Aleksandr's question is: Yes, this is a known issue --
nauty
AFAIK both implement the same basic algorithm. My guess is that nauty
quickly realizes that it has a huge problem and starts constructing graph
invariants in an attempt to answer it to the negative. If you were to
compare two graphs that are actually isomorphic I'm pretty sure that you
The license of nauty is not gpl compatible, so we can't distribute it with
Sage. There is an optional package that you can try if you want.
On Friday, February 28, 2014 10:18:44 PM UTC+1, Aleksandr Kodess wrote:
As far as I know both sage and magma utilize Brendan McKay's program nauty
in
