Closed mantepse closed 1 year ago
Another bug, maybe related
sage: e0 = species.EmptySetSpecies()
....: e1 = species.SingletonSpecies()
....: e2 = species.SetSpecies(2, 3)
....: nt = CombinatorialSpecies()
....: nt.define(e1 * (e0 + nt + nt * nt + e2(nt)))
....: ntl = nt.isotype_generating_series()
....: ntl.compute_coefficients(10)
....: ntl
x + x^2 + 2*x^3 + 3*x^4 + 7*x^5 + 16*x^6 + 45*x^7 + 124*x^8 + 368*x^9 + 1095*x^10 + O(x^11)
sage: ntc = nt.cycle_index_series()
....: ntc.compute_coefficients(10)
....: s = SymmetricFunctions(QQ).schur()
....: [ntc.coefficient(i).scalar(s[i]) for i in range(7)]
[0, 1, 1, 3, 6, 17, 44]
Moving to 9.4, as 9.3 has been released.
Changed keywords from species to species, LazyPowerSeries
I cannot reproduce this with the new code, so very likely, this can be closed after #34552.
so, shall we close this one now ?
I sometimes get wrong results when computing large coefficients in the cycle index series for graphs, and then also for the isotype generating series:
Unfortunately, I cannot quite reproduce this yet.
It always happens if I interrupt the computation and then ask for the coefficients again, but sometimes it happens otherwise, too.
Component: combinatorics
Keywords: species, LazyPowerSeries
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/30691