Timeline for Computer algebra errors
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 20, 2016 at 13:44 | comment | added | Charles | On the mailing list Bill says this was a bug in 2.3 which was fixed in 2.5.0. I can verify that it does not affect 2.8.0. | |
| Jul 16, 2012 at 1:12 | comment | added | Kevin O'Bryant | I'm not aware of any other GRH-conditional solver. The only place I imagine GRH being relevant is in the linear-forms-in-logarithms stage, and then it would only affect the initial bound on x. If that's correct, there really isn't any reason for the implementations to be different at all. Could the GRH bound actually come out below 27 (and therefore be missing a constant or worse)? | |
| Jul 13, 2012 at 5:16 | comment | added | joro | Kevin thanks. pari has unconditional thue solver too (the second thue() in the example) and it agrees with your solutions. pari's GRH conditional solver is faster than the unconditional (in some cases the unconditional might be undoable). Do you happen to know other GRH conditional thue solver implementation? | |
| Jul 12, 2012 at 14:56 | comment | added | Kevin O'Bryant |
FYI, Mathematica has an unconditional Thue solver built in (I had something to do with that): the input Reduce[x^3 - 18 x^2 y + 81 x y^2 + y^3 == 27, Integers]'' yields the output (x == 0 && y == 3) || (x == 3 && y == 0) || (x == 19 && y == 2) || (x == 27 && y == 3)''.
|
|
| Jul 11, 2012 at 11:33 | history | answered | joro | CC BY-SA 3.0 |