Timeline for How to efficiently generate a wreath product?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 31, 2011 at 3:49 | comment | added | Dikran Karagueuzian | It might also be that you have extra information about $G$ and $H$ that is useful. As a simple example, if you were interested in the minimality of the generating set and if $H$ were transitive, you could take a set of generators for $G \times 1 \times \cdots \times 1$ and use $H$ to get a set of generators for $G \times \cdots \times G$. | |
| Aug 31, 2011 at 3:49 | comment | added | Dikran Karagueuzian | By "more careful statement", I mean something mathematically definable to replace "more work than necessary" in the orginal post. For example, we could ask for the smallest possible set of generators of the wreath product. But this might not be what you want--maybe you'll later need to enumerate every element of the group. If that were true the minimality of a generating set might be a liability. | |
| Aug 30, 2011 at 5:07 | vote | accept | CommunityBot | ||
| Aug 30, 2011 at 5:00 | comment | added | user17474 | What do you mean by a more careful statement? My intention is to algorithmically generate a set much like this for testing equivalence of normal form games. | |
| Aug 30, 2011 at 4:51 | history | answered | Dikran Karagueuzian | CC BY-SA 3.0 |