Determine planned extent of classical modular forms

[davidfarmer]

Change the ranges in issues #448, #450, and #451 to something reasonable, and make
a similar decision for very small weight and very small level. Then describe the available data in
a data extent knowl.

[davidfarmer]

The "critical" label was removed because we now have a data extent knowl at the top of
/ModularForm/GL2/Q/holomorphic/

[AndrewVSutherland]

The critical label has been added back because the data extent knowl (displayed on the top of http://www.lmfdb.org/ModularForm/GL2/Q/holomorphic/) does not agree with the data.

Once it does we can close this issue but until it does I think it is crtical.

I don't think we need to keep issues #448, #450, and #451 open; if someone wants to create a new issue labeled as a feature request with a desired range of classical modular forms, that's fine, but it probably makes sense to wait until this issue is addressed.

[davidfarmer]

I am okay with closing #448, #450, and #451.

The data extent knowl explains what we have, and later someone may wish
to specifically propose another rectangle (such as a rectangle for
real characters).

On Thu, 19 May 2016, Andrew Sutherland wrote:

The critical label has been added back because the data extent knowl (displayed on the top of
http://www.lmfdb.org/ModularForm/GL2/Q/holomorphic/) does not agree with the data.

Once it does we can close this issue but until it does I think it is crtical.

I don't think we need to keep issues #448, #450, and #451 open; if someone wants to create a new
issue labeled as a feature request with a desired range of classical modular forms, that's fine, but
it probably makes sense to wai t until this issue is addressed.

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on
GitHub[AAM6LCOQvQTaaq-jqpgipnudUxdciFLhks5qDRFtgaJpZM4H5-pr.gif]

[AndrewVSutherland]

We have made some good forward progress. With #1376 closed, we now have complete data for all the spaces with trivial character in the ranges (k,N) in [2,40] x [1,24] and (k,N) in [2,12] x [1,100](in fact we also have %28k,N%29 in [2,40] x {25}, which is beyond the extent listed in the knowl -- I will update it). It remains to address the spaces with non-trivial character. I note that for N=41 both k=5 and k=7 are definitely missing, and the completeness (and correctness) of the remaining data still needs to be verified (this is #1248).

[sehlen]

Actually, it is [2, 40] x [2, 25]. It's very easy to extend that but next
week we'll concentrate on fixing non-trivial character data.

On Sat, May 21, 2016, 06:31 Andrew Sutherland notifications@github.com
wrote:

We have made some good forward progress. With #1376
#1376 closed, we now have complete
data for all the spaces with trivial character in the ranges (k,N) in
[2,40] x [1,24] and (k,N) in [2,12] x 1,100. It remains to address the
spaces with non-trivial character. I note that for N=41 both k=5 and k=7
are definitely missing, and the completeness (and correctness) of the
remaining data still needs to be verified (this is #1248
#1248).

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#873 (comment)

[sehlen]

I meant [2, 40] x [1, 25]. Will extend this soon.

On Sat, May 21, 2016, 08:37 Stephan Ehlen stephan@die-ehlens.de wrote:

Actually, it is [2, 40] x [2, 25]. It's very easy to extend that but next
week we'll concentrate on fixing non-trivial character data.

On Sat, May 21, 2016, 06:31 Andrew Sutherland notifications@github.com
wrote:

We have made some good forward progress. With #1376
#1376 closed, we now have
complete data for all the spaces with trivial character in the ranges (k,N)
in [2,40] x [1,24] and (k,N) in [2,12] x 1,100. It remains to address
the spaces with non-trivial character. I note that for N=41 both k=5 and
k=7 are definitely missing, and the completeness (and correctness) of the
remaining data still needs to be verified (this is #1248
#1248).

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#873 (comment)

[AndrewVSutherland]

@sehlen, right I actually updated the extent knowl earlier to reflect the expanded range. But I agree that we should focus on completing/fixing the non-trivial character data before extending it further.

[AndrewVSutherland]

I extended the range of pages tested by emf_test_pages.py to include (k,N) = [2,12] x [1,100] and found a problem with k=12 and N=83, see #1248 (comment).

[AndrewVSutherland]

There are still many holes, even for trivial character, e.g. http://www.lmfdb.xyz/ModularForm/GL2/Q/holomorphic/17/6/1/.

Several of these show up in the flasklog on the cloud server, and the pattern suggests that it is people (not robots) clicking on them.

[AndrewVSutherland]

Addressed by #2717, see http://www.lmfdb.org/ModularForm/GL2/Q/holomorphic/Completeness.