Post a reply
Username:
Note:If not registered, provide any username. For more comfort, register here.
Subject:
Message body:
Enter your message here, it may contain no more than 60000 characters. 

Smilies
:D :) :( :o :shock: :? 8) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :wink: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen:
Font size:
Font colour
Options:
BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON
Disable BBCode
Disable smilies
Do not automatically parse URLs
Confirmation of post
To prevent automated posts the board requires you to enter a confirmation code. The code is displayed in the image you should see below. If you are visually impaired or cannot otherwise read this code please contact the %sBoard Administrator%s.
Confirmation code:
Enter the code exactly as it appears. All letters are case insensitive, there is no zero.
   

Topic review - Absolute primary decomposition: bug?
Author Message
  Post subject:  Re: Absolute primary decomposition: bug?  Reply with quote
I forgot to say that K.1 just means the imaginary unit i.
Post Posted: Wed Apr 10, 2013 12:26 pm
  Post subject:  Absolute primary decomposition: bug?  Reply with quote
Using Singular 3.1.6 I tried to compute the absolute primary decomposition of the following ideal, defined over the rationals:

Code:
ring R = 0,T(1..4),dp;
ideal I =
T(3)^2+T(4)^2,
T(1)^2-T(2)^2-T(4)^2;

LIB "primdec.lib";

def S = absPrimdecGTZ(I);
setring S;
absolute_primes;


This results in the following output (to my knowledge the algorithm guesses random smooth points, so you may get different but isomorphic results):

Code:
[1]:
   [1]:
      _[1]=a^2+1
      _[2]=-47*T(1)*T(3)+T(3)^2-47*T(1)*T(4)*a+T(3)*T(4)*a
      _[3]=-2209*T(1)^2+2209*T(2)^2+T(3)^2+2210*T(4)^2
      _[4]=T(1)^2-T(2)^2-T(4)^2
   [2]:
      2


This means that there are two conjugate components, where for one of them you use a = i and for the other a = -i where i is the imaginary unit.

However, I think that these ideals are not prime (apply the above algorithm again on one of these components), neither are their radicals.

Using another software system, over QQ(i), i.e. the rationals with the imaginary unit adjoint, I get the following primary decomposition of I, which I think should be the result:

Code:
        T[1]^2 - T[2]^2 - T[4]^2,
        T[3] + K.1*T[4]


and

Code:
        T[1]^2 - T[2]^2 - T[4]^2,
        T[3] - K.1*T[4]


Is there a bug or did I use something in the wrong way?
Thanks in advance for your help.
Post Posted: Wed Apr 10, 2013 12:24 pm


It is currently Fri May 13, 2022 11:05 am
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group