Closed elarson314 closed 9 years ago
Commit: 00199fb
Author: Eric Larson
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
fdbb133 | Added code to bound isogenies to the GaloisRepresentation class |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
ea410d4 | Revert "Updated Sage version to 6.3" |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
4b1a2d4 | Revert "Revert "Updated Sage version to 6.3"" |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
12c6f01 | comitting because git wants me to? |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
dc0185c | sorted out now? |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
8771832 | forgot to import Set |
OK -- branch now works, I successfully merged it into my own working branch for #16743 (which does not yet use this new code).
Reviewer: John Cremona
Changed branch from u/elarson3/isogeny_bounds_for_elliptic_curves_over_number_fields to u/cremona/ticket/16806
I made some rather superficial changes to the new function and added a couple more examples. The changes simlify the code while retaining exactly the same logic. I had to rename the branch on trac (it is now u/cremona/ticket/16806) as that's the way it has to be (I cannot edit a u/elarson3 branch).
My edits were superficial, otherwise I give the original new code a positive review. That means that if you are happy with my additional changes we can jointly give it a positive review. Before that I'll merge in the current develop branch and re-upload, but the changes I made should all be visible already in the commit 828ed6f.
New commits:
cadd58f | Merge remote-tracking branch 'trac/u/elarson3/isogeny_bounds_for_elliptic_curves_over_number_fields' into larson |
828ed6f | #16806: reviewer's patch |
Forget the last part of my previous comment: I had already done the merge, as you can see from the list of new commits (first the merge, then my reviewer's patch). So this is ready for re-review by the original author!
I have now made #16743 dependent on this (isogeny classes of elliptic curves over number fields), which means that I am keener than ever to get this merged.
A few comments:
The docstring of the main function reads ""Returns a list of primes p
including all primes for which the mod-p
representation might not be contained in a Borel."" Isn't it the complement, i.e., all those that "may be contained in a Borel" ?
I thought "try: ... except ValueError
: return [0]" is not what we should do. If the long and convoluted line in try produces a ValueError
, that could have many reasons, and we should not just ignore this and send back [0] but pass the error on.
It is a shame that this function will not be available for curves over Q. But I guess it should be a separate ticket to merge the two classes dealing with Galois Reps together at some point.
Replying to @categorie:
A few comments:
- The docstring of the main function reads ""Returns a list of primes
p
including all primes for which the mod-p
representation might not be contained in a Borel."" Isn't it the complement, i.e., all those that "may be contained in a Borel" ?
You are right.
- I thought "try: ... except
ValueError
: return [0]" is not what we should do. If the long and convoluted line in try produces aValueError
, that could have many reasons, and we should not just ignore this and send back [0] but pass the error on.
I'm to blame for the long line -- the original version had this split over many lines. The set we return is the union of (1) primes of additive reduction (found as factors of gcd(c4,Delta) in effect; (2) primes ramified in the field; (3) the ones returned by _semistable_reducible_primes. The latter function uses [0] to denote CM. So I cannot see what circumstances will lead to a ValueError, and suggest we can simplify this.
- It is a shame that this function will not be available for curves over Q. But I guess it should be a separate ticket to merge the two classes dealing with Galois Reps together at some point.
Agreed. I said so myself somewhere.
I will revise the branch to take into account your first two points...
I made cosmetic changes in line with Chris's comments: various tidying of docstrings (including fixing that double negative) and simplifying (making clearer I hope) the two long lines where various sets of primes are collected. It turned out that a try/except is needed since the function _semistable_reducible_primes() does raise a ValueError if given a CM curve.
Ready for a new review!
Changed branch from u/cremona/ticket/16806 to u/wuthrich/ticket/16806
Am I right that the file does not appear in the reference manual ?
I added this and modified the starting docstring so that the reference manual builds.
Starting testing now. Except a positive review soon.
New commits:
8c93016 | trac 16806: include in documentation |
Thanks. I seem to have forgotten to check that building the docs worked, but that would have been null anyway until you added it to the manual. Good!
Changed reviewer from John Cremona to John Cremona, Chris Wuthrich
Thanks!
Changed branch from u/wuthrich/ticket/16806 to 8c93016
CC: @JohnCremona @categorie
Component: elliptic curves
Author: Eric Larson
Branch/Commit:
8c93016
Reviewer: John Cremona, Chris Wuthrich
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16806