-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 201
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Make pretty coefficients #654
Comments
Nicolas wrote a script which will be incorporated into the LMFDB code after consideration by Stephan and/or Fredrik. |
I am removing December from this one; it still has v1.0 |
Perhaps this issue should be merged with #1237 |
I think these are two separate issues. I think @fredstro started using Nicolas Mascot's pari script already and tested it a bit but I don't know how much it helped and if it has been tested enough. But I know for sure that it does not always terminate and that we need a smart way of calling it with a timeout or we might need to improve the routine. It might in fact be better to improve the way sage computes the coefficients in the first place to not do work twice when computing the forms. Btw, my impression is that the data magma produces is not better at all but I can take a look at it in a more systematic way at some point. |
OK, lets keep them separate (and FWIW I don't think Magma is much better at this, if anything is likely to help it is probably Pari). I am in the process of writing up a separate issue, which is how we identify the coefficient field, where we can easily do something much better than what we are are doing now (but this is a separate issue from choosing a basis that gives nice q-expansion coefficients). |
What do you mean with "identify the coefficient field"? Do you mean finding the lmfdb-label? (We save the lmfdb label then in the db). |
Addressed by #2717. |
Use pari to find nicer coefficients
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: