Back to Forum | View unanswered posts | View active topics
Topic review - TOP module ordering |
Author |
Message |
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: TOP module ordering |
|
|
Already ring r=0,(x,y,z), (c,dp); or ring r=0,(x,y,z),(C,dp); are big improvements for me. So maybe you can tell me where to look to get "signature-based" or Schreyer orderings in Singular, as I can't seem to find them mentioned in the online manual.
Already ring r=0,(x,y,z), (c,dp); or ring r=0,(x,y,z),(C,dp); are big improvements for me. So maybe you can tell me where to look to get "signature-based" or Schreyer orderings in Singular, as I can't seem to find them mentioned in the online manual.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 19, 2022 7:26 am |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
Re: TOP module ordering |
|
|
You can have POT or TOP for free resolutions - depending on the ordering of the ring (therefore a ring in singular has always also a module ordering, even if only ideals are defined in it). There are also different algorithm to compute free resolution, some of them use internally a diffirent ordering, for example fres (Schreyer ordering or 'signature based'), lres (dp,c or TOP), etc.
You can have POT or TOP for free resolutions - depending on the ordering of the ring (therefore a ring in singular has always also a module ordering, even if only ideals are defined in it). There are also different algorithm to compute free resolution, some of them use internally a diffirent ordering, for example fres (Schreyer ordering or 'signature based'), lres (dp,c or TOP), etc.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 18, 2022 3:57 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: |
TOP module ordering |
|
|
Maybe someone knows why TOP seems to have been chosen as the only module ordering to use in free resolutions of ideals and modules. I would have though the default that makes most sense as a mathematical default would have been POT, but I would rather use a signature-based ordering in the ideal case, which means each new map in the free resolution has a slightly different ordering based on the names (signatures) of the module generators. (As an aside, I am not a fan of minimizing here, just as I am not a fan of minimizing as done in normal.lib, since it is not really mathematically driven, only minimization-driven.)
Maybe someone knows why TOP seems to have been chosen as the only module ordering to use in free resolutions of ideals and modules. I would have though the default that makes most sense as a mathematical default would have been POT, but I would rather use a signature-based ordering in the ideal case, which means each new map in the free resolution has a slightly different ordering based on the names (signatures) of the module generators. (As an aside, I am not a fan of minimizing here, just as I am not a fan of minimizing as done in normal.lib, since it is not really mathematically driven, only minimization-driven.)
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2022 11:50 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
It is currently Fri May 13, 2022 10:54 am
|
|